AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD FirePro W7000 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD FirePro W7000 and AMD FirePro D300 are two end-of-life professional graphics cards built on the same Pitcairn chip and GCN 1.0 architecture, yet benchmark results show they serve distinctly different priorities. The data splits the pair almost perfectly: the W7000 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 22001 against the D300’s 19759, a decisive 11.3% advantage, while the D300 takes the Geekbench OpenCL test at 19515 versus 17808, an 8.7% margin. With one win apiece, the choice hinges on workload type rather than overall superiority.

For users running Vulkan-based applications, the W7000 is the clear pick — its 22001 Vulkan score sits 11.3% above the D300, and its average benchmark score of 19905 edges out the D300’s 19637 by 1.4%. The W7000 also carries 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the D300’s 2 GB, which matters for larger datasets even if the D300 counters with slightly faster memory clocks. Conversely, the D300 dominates in OpenCL compute, posting 19515 versus 17808, and its average score of 19637 places it within 0.2% of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602), while the W7000 trails that same rival by 1.5%. The D300’s 64th percentile ranking among all GPUs is just one point behind the W7000’s 65th, so neither card offers a meaningful overall standing advantage.

The verdict: pick the W7000 for Vulkan-centric workflows and higher memory capacity; pick the D300 for OpenCL-heavy compute tasks where its raw score advantage and tighter rivalry positioning matter more. Neither card justifies a premium — both are end-of-life, single-slot designs with 150 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU requirements — but the data clearly separates their strengths.

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro W7000 — Vulkan Performance and Memory Capacity

The W7000’s headline victory is in Geekbench Vulkan, where its 22001 score beats the D300’s 19759 by 11.3%. This is the largest delta between the two cards in any benchmark, making the W7000 the superior choice for Vulkan-based rendering, simulation, or compute workloads. Additionally, the W7000 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, whereas the D300 is limited to 2 GB. While memory bandwidth favors the D300 (162.6 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s), the W7000’s doubled capacity gives it headroom for larger textures, buffers, or models that would exceed the D300’s 2 GB frame buffer. The W7000 also posts a higher pixel rate of 30.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 76.00 GTexel/s, versus the D300’s 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s, indicating faster rasterization throughput in fill-limited scenes.

AMD FirePro D300 — OpenCL Compute and Competitive Positioning

The D300 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 19515, an 8.7% advantage over the W7000’s 17808. This makes the D300 the better option for OpenCL-based compute tasks, such as GPU-accelerated physics, image processing, or scientific workloads that rely on this API. The D300’s memory clock runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) versus the W7000’s 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps), yielding higher bandwidth at 162.6 GB/s, which likely contributes to its OpenCL edge. The D300 also achieves an average benchmark score of 19637, just 1.4% below the W7000’s 19905, but its nearest rival comparison shows tighter clustering: the D300 sits within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19410) and 1.2% of the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19885), whereas the W7000’s closest rival, the Tesla K40m, is only 0.1% away. For users prioritizing OpenCL performance, the D300 delivers a measurable win despite its smaller memory pool.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same fundamental silicon: AMD’s Pitcairn chip, built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. Each integrates 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The shading unit count is identical at 1280, as are the texture units (80) and ROPs (32). Neither card supports ray tracing or tensor cores, and both expose the same API feature set: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for both, and both output 4x DisplayPort 1.2.

The differences are subtle but meaningful. The W7000’s memory operates at 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) with 4 GB of GDDR5, while the D300 runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) with only 2 GB. This gives the D300 a bandwidth advantage (162.6 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s) but halves its capacity. The W7000’s pixel rate of 30.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 76.00 GTexel/s exceed the D300’s 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s, implying higher clock speeds on the graphics core itself, though base and boost clocks are not listed. The W7000’s FP32 throughput is 2.432 TFLOPS versus the D300’s 2.176 TFLOPS, a 10.5% gap that aligns with its Vulkan lead.

Physically, both cards are single-slot, 242 mm long, and 111 mm tall (the D300’s height is not listed). The W7000 requires one 6-pin power connector, while the D300 lists no power connector requirement. Both share a 150 W TDP and a 450 W suggested PSU. The W7000 launched on 2012-06-12 with a launch MSRP of 899 USD; the D300 followed on 2014-01-17 with no MSRP listed. The W7000’s generation is labeled FirePro GCN (Wx000), while the D300 belongs to FirePro Data Center (Dx00), reflecting their different market intents despite identical silicon. The W7000’s successor is Radeon Pro Polaris, whereas the D300’s successor is Radeon Instinct, further underscoring the D300’s compute-oriented positioning.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The W7000, with an average score of 19905, is 1.4% ahead of the D300’s 19637. However, the D300’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K5200, sits only 0.2% away from it, while the W7000’s closest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m, is 0.1% away.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The D300 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 19515, beating the W7000’s 17808 by 8.7%. This is the D300’s strongest benchmark result.

Q: Which card is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The W7000 is significantly better, scoring 22001 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the D300’s 19759, a delta of 11.3%. This is the largest performance gap in any head-to-head test between the two.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: No. The W7000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the D300 has 2 GB on the same bus width. The D300 compensates with faster memory clocks (1270 MHz versus 1200 MHz), giving it higher bandwidth at 162.6 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s.

Q: Are there any architectural differences between the two?

A: They share the same Pitcairn chip, GCN 1.0 architecture, 28 nm TSMC process, 2,800 million transistors, 212 mm² die size, 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The only listed differences are memory size, memory clock, and the resulting pixel/texture rates and FP32 throughput.

Q: What are the power and physical requirements?

A: Both cards have a 150 W TDP and recommend a 450 W PSU. Both are single-slot and 242 mm long. The W7000 requires a single 6-pin power connector, while the D300 lists no power connector requirement.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two Geekbench results tell a clear story of workload-dependent performance. In Geekbench OpenCL, the D300 posts 19515 against the W7000’s 17808, a difference of -8.7% for the W7000. This is a substantial margin, suggesting the D300’s higher memory bandwidth (162.6 GB/s) and faster memory clock (1270 MHz versus 1200 MHz) provide a real advantage in OpenCL compute tasks that are sensitive to memory throughput. The D300’s score also places it remarkably close to the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602, only 0.2% away) and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19410, 1.2% away), indicating that this older card remains competitive in compute-oriented synthetic loads.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the tables turn decisively. The W7000 achieves 22001, beating the D300’s 19759 by 11.3%. This is the largest delta between the two cards in any test, and it aligns with the W7000’s higher FP32 throughput (2.432 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS) and faster pixel and texture rates (30.40 GPixel/s and 76.00 GTexel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s). The Vulkan test likely stresses the graphics pipeline more heavily, where the W7000’s extra memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB) and higher core throughput give it a clear edge. The W7000’s Vulkan score also exceeds its own OpenCL result by 23.5%, while the D300’s Vulkan score is only 1.3% above its OpenCL score, showing that the W7000’s architecture is particularly well-suited to Vulkan’s lower-level API access.

Looking at the broader rivalry context, the W7000’s average score of 19905 puts it 0.1% above the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19885) and 0.7% above the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19765). The D300’s average of 19637 is 0.2% above the Quadro K5200 (19602) and 1.2% above the RX 7900 XTX (19410), but 1.2% below the Tesla K40m. Neither card dominates its peer group, but the W7000’s Vulkan win is the single most decisive benchmark result in the comparison, making it the stronger choice for API-agnostic or Vulkan-forward workflows, while the D300’s OpenCL victory makes it the compute specialist.