Radeon R9 M375 vs FirePro M4150
Radeon R9 M375
Popular choices:
FirePro M4150
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 Radeon R9 M375 is positioned at rank 565 and the FirePro M4150 is on rank 211, so the FirePro M4150 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M375
Performance Per Dollar FirePro M4150
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro M4150 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M375.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro M4150 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro M4150 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $300), it costs 83% less, resulting in a 507.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+507.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 M375 and FirePro M4150
Radeon R9 M375
The Radeon R9 M375 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1015 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 998 points.
FirePro M4150
The FirePro M4150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 16 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 715 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,011 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M375 scores 998 and the FirePro M4150 reaches 1,011 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M375 is built on GCN 1.0 while the FirePro M4150 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R9 M375) vs 384 (FirePro M4150). Raw compute: 1.299 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M375) vs 0.5491 TFLOPS (FirePro M4150).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 998 | 1,011+1% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+67% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.299 TFLOPS+137% | 0.5491 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+67% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11_1 (Radeon R9 M375) vs 12 (FirePro M4150). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11_1 | 12+9% |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6+7% |
| Max Displays | 3 | 6+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 M375) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro M4150). Decoder: UVD 6.0 vs UVD. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-4,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R9 M375) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro M4150).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.0 | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 6.0 | UVD |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-4,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M375 draws 75W versus the FirePro M4150's 150W — a 66.7% difference. The Radeon R9 M375 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M375) vs 350W (FirePro M4150). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-50% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 70°C-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 13.3+99% | 6.7 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M375 launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the FirePro M4150 launched at $200 and now averages $50. The FirePro M4150 costs 83.3% less ($250 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.3 (Radeon R9 M375) vs 20.2 (FirePro M4150) — the FirePro M4150 offers 512.1% better value. The Radeon R9 M375 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M375 | FirePro M4150 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300 | $200-33% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | $50-83% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.3 | 20.2+512% |
| Codename | Tropo | Opal |
| Release | May 5 2015 | October 16 2013 |
| Ranking | #889 | #879 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 M375 and FirePro M4150
