AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD FirePro D500 Comparison

The AMD FirePro D300 and AMD FirePro D500 are two professional graphics cards from the same FirePro Data Center generation, both built on the GCN 1.0 architecture and released on the same date. While they share a common lineage and API support, the benchmark data reveals a clear performance hierarchy that diverges from what their respective chip sizes might suggest. The D300, built on the smaller Pitcairn chip, posts a higher average benchmark score and leads in the only head-to-head test, while the D500, with its larger Tahiti die and greater memory capacity, trails in that same comparison. This analysis breaks down the quantitative results, architectural distinctions, and practical implications of choosing between these two end-of-life workstation cards.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between the two cards is the Geekbench Vulkan test, and the results are decisive. The AMD FirePro D300 scores 19,759 points, while the AMD FirePro D500 scores 18,533 points, giving the D300 a 6.6% advantage. This is a significant margin in a GPU-bound workload, indicating that the D300’s higher pixel rate and more efficient shader utilization translate into better real-world Vulkan performance despite the D500’s larger memory bus and greater shading unit count.

The D300’s Vulkan win is corroborated by its broader benchmark portfolio. It also has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 19,515, which, when averaged with its Vulkan result, yields an average benchmark score of 19,637. The D500’s average, based solely on its Vulkan score, is 18,533. This means the D300 holds a 5.6% lead in overall average score, a gap that places it in a higher percentile bracket. The D300 sits in the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the D500 sits in the 62nd, a two-percentile difference that, while modest, reinforces the trend seen in the direct comparison.

Examining the nearest rivals further contextualizes these scores. The D300’s average of 19,637 places it within a tight cluster of competitors: it is a mere 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602) and 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765). It also edges out the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX by 1.2% (19,410 vs. 19,637) but trails the NVIDIA Tesla K40m by 1.2% (19,885). The D500’s average of 18,533 puts it in similar company: it is 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560X (18,626), 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18,685), and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Arc A770M (18,383). It also leads the AMD Radeon RX 460 by 0.9% (18,373). The D300’s rivals are higher-tier cards, while the D500’s are more mainstream, underscoring the performance gap between the two FirePro models.

Where Each One Wins

The D300 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench Vulkan test, and by extension holds the sole win in the wins tally (1 win for the D300, 0 for the D500). This makes it the clear choice for Vulkan-based compute workloads, where its 27.20 GPixel/s pixel rate and 68.00 GTexel/s texture rate allow it to outperform the D500’s 23.20 GPixel/s and 69.60 GTexel/s respectively. The D300’s higher pixel rate is particularly relevant for tasks that rely on rasterization and fill-rate-bound operations, despite the D500’s marginally higher texture rate.

The D500, however, is not without its strengths, even if they do not translate into benchmark victories. Its memory subsystem is substantially larger: 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus delivers 243.8 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the D300’s 2 GB on a 256-bit bus yielding 162.6 GB/s. This 50% increase in memory bandwidth and 50% larger frame buffer makes the D500 better suited for workloads that exceed 2 GB of VRAM or that are heavily memory-bandwidth-bound, such as large texture sets or high-resolution display outputs. The D500 also offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs plus one SDI connection, versus the D300’s four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, making it a more versatile option for multi-display or broadcast environments.

In terms of raw compute, the D500 has a slight edge in FP32 throughput at 2.227 TFLOPS versus the D300’s 2.176 TFLOPS, a 2.3% difference. It also has more shading units (1,536 vs. 1,280) and more texture mapping units (96 vs. 80), which could benefit shader-heavy applications. However, these theoretical advantages do not manifest in the Vulkan benchmark, where the D300’s architectural efficiency wins out. The D300 also has a lower TDP of 150 W versus the D500’s 274 W, and a single-slot design versus the D500’s dual-slot, making it easier to integrate into dense systems.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro D300, with an average score of 19,637, outperforms the AMD FirePro D500, which averages 18,533. This represents a 5.6% advantage for the D300.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The D300 scores 19,759, while the D500 scores 18,533, giving the D300 a 6.6% lead. This is the only head-to-head benchmark recorded, and the D300 wins it outright.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The D500 has 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 243.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The D300 has 2 GB on a 256-bit bus, providing 162.6 GB/s. The D500 offers 50% more memory and 50% more bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The D300 has a higher pixel rate at 27.20 GPixel/s, compared to the D500’s 23.20 GPixel/s. This likely contributes to the D300’s Vulkan benchmark victory.

Q: Are there any differences in display outputs?

A: Yes. The D500 offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs plus one SDI connection, while the D300 offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The D500 supports more simultaneous displays.

Q: How do the cards rank against their nearest rivals?

A: The D300 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 and 1.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX. The D500 is 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560X and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Arc A770M.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specifications. The D300 uses the Pitcairn chip with 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, while the D500 uses the Tahiti chip with 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. This translates to a transistor density of 13.2M / mm² for the D300 and 12.3M / mm² for the D500. The D300 has 1,280 shading units and 80 TMUs, while the D500 has 1,536 shading units and 96 TMUs. Both have 32 ROPs.

Memory differs significantly: the D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 162.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the D500 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 243.8 GB/s bandwidth. The D300’s pixel rate is 27.20 GPixel/s versus the D500’s 23.20 GPixel/s, but the D500’s texture rate is 69.60 GTexel/s versus the D300’s 68.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is nearly identical at 2.176 TFLOPS for the D300 and 2.227 TFLOPS for the D500.

Physical and power characteristics also diverge. The D300 has a TDP of 150 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W, while the D500 has a TDP of 274 W and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The D300 is a single-slot card measuring 242 mm (9.5 inches) in length, whereas the D500 is a dual-slot card measuring 279 mm (11 inches). Display outputs differ as noted: the D300 has four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the D500 has six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and one SDI.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the GCN 1.0 architecture and use a 28 nm process node from TSMC, but they employ different chips. The D300 uses Pitcairn, a smaller die at 212 mm² with 2,800 million transistors, while the D500 uses Tahiti, a larger die at 352 mm² with 4,313 million transistors. The larger Tahiti die houses 20% more shading units (1,536 vs. 1,280) and 20% more TMUs (96 vs. 80), yet both cards maintain the same ROP count of 32.

The memory architecture differs fundamentally. The D500’s 384-bit memory bus is 50% wider than the D300’s 256-bit bus, enabling the 243.8 GB/s bandwidth figure. However, the memory clock is identical at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) for both cards. The D500’s larger frame buffer of 3 GB versus 2 GB is a direct consequence of the wider bus and larger chip.

Both cards share the same API support: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. They also share the same generation (FirePro Data Center Dx00), release date, and production status (end-of-life). Neither card has a launch MSRP listed, and both have null base and boost clocks, with only memory clock specified. The D500’s higher TDP of 274 W reflects the larger die and additional memory, while the D300’s 150 W TDP and single-slot profile make it a lower-power, more compact alternative. The D500’s additional display outputs and SDI connectivity suggest a design intent for multi-display or broadcast use, while the D300’s simpler output set targets standard workstation configurations.