FirePro M4170 vs GeForce GTX 670M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 670M with FirePro M4170, including specs and performance data.

GTX 670M
2012
1536 MB GDDR5, 75 Watt
4.04
+46.4%

670M outperforms M4170 by a considerable 46% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking728838
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.17no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameGF114Opal
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date22 March 2012 (13 years ago)23 April 2015 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores336384
Core clock speed598 MHz825 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattno data
Texture fill rate33.4921.60
Floating-point processing power0.8037 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs248
TMUs5624
L1 Cache448 KB96 KB
L2 Cache384 KB256 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB1 GB
Memory bus width192bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth72.0 GB/s64 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 API12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.16.5 (5.1)
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.12.1 (1.2)
VulkanN/A1.2.170
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 670M 4.04
+46.4%
FirePro M4170 2.76

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 670M 1707
+46.3%
Samples: 667
FirePro M4170 1167
Samples: 25

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 670M 6617
+4.3%
FirePro M4170 6347

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p39
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Full HD41
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Fortnite 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Valorant 55−60
+57.1%
35−40
−57.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 91
+51.7%
60−65
−51.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Dota 2 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Fortnite 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Valorant 55−60
+57.1%
35−40
−57.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Dota 2 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Valorant 55−60
+57.1%
35−40
−57.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Valorant 40−45
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Valorant 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how GTX 670M and FirePro M4170 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 670M is 63% faster in 900p
  • GTX 670M is 52% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.04 2.76
Recency 22 March 2012 23 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

GTX 670M has a 46.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro M4170, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 670M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M4170 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 670M is a notebook graphics card while FirePro M4170 is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M
GeForce GTX 670M
AMD FirePro M4170
FirePro M4170

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 97 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 670M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 7 votes

Rate FirePro M4170 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 670M or FirePro M4170, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.