CPU
GPU
FireStream 9270
Popular choices:
FirePro M40003
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FireStream 9270 is positioned at rank 359 and the FirePro M40003 is on rank 151, so the FirePro M40003 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9270
Performance Per Dollar FirePro M40003
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro M40003 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FireStream 9270.
| Insight | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FireStream 9270 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FireStream 9270 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $72), it costs 72% less, resulting in a 253.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+253.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($72) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FireStream 9270 and FirePro M40003
FireStream 9270
The FireStream 9270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,341 points.
FirePro M40003
The FirePro M40003 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 27 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,364 points.
Graphics Performance
The FireStream 9270 scores 1,341 and the FirePro M40003 reaches 1,364 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9270 is built on TeraScale while the FirePro M40003 uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9270) vs 512 (FirePro M40003). Raw compute: 1.2 TFLOPS (FireStream 9270) vs 0.6912 TFLOPS (FirePro M40003).
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,341 | 1,364+2% |
| Architecture | TeraScale | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+56% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.2 TFLOPS+74% | 0.6912 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40+25% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+25% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FireStream 9270 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro M40003 has 4 GB. The FirePro M40003 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9270) vs 12 (FirePro M40003). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 6.
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12+19% |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 1 | 6+500% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9270) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro M40003). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FireStream 9270) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (FirePro M40003).
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 2.2 | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The FireStream 9270 draws 160W versus the FirePro M40003's 33W — a 131.6% difference. The FirePro M40003 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9270) vs 350W (FirePro M40003). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 82mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 160W | 33W-79% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 82mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 75°C-12% |
| Perf/Watt | 8.4 | 41.3+392% |
Value Analysis
The FireStream 9270 launched at $1499 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the FirePro M40003 launched at $150 and now averages $72. The FireStream 9270 costs 72.2% less ($52 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 67.0 (FireStream 9270) vs 18.9 (FirePro M40003) — the FireStream 9270 offers 254.5% better value. The FirePro M40003 is the newer GPU (2012 vs 2008).
| Feature | FireStream 9270 | FirePro M40003 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1499 | $150-90% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-72% | $72 |
| Performance per Dollar | 67.0+254% | 18.9 |
| Codename | RV770 | Chelsea |
| Release | November 13 2008 | June 27 2012 |
| Ranking | #790 | #752 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FireStream 9270 and FirePro M40003
