AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD Radeon HD 8970M Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 8970M and AMD FirePro D300 are both built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture, but the benchmark data shows a clear winner: the HD 8970M takes the sole head-to-head test with an 8.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This is not a close contest in raw compute, yet the two cards are positioned for entirely different environments, and that distinction matters more than the score alone.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 8970M is the performance winner in mobile compute workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 21,237 places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro D300 scores 19,515 in the same test and sits at the 64th percentile. The HD 8970M’s advantage is substantial enough to be meaningful for any task that relies on OpenCL acceleration, such as rendering or scientific simulation on the move.

The AMD FirePro D300, despite losing the compute comparison, claims a unique capability that the HD 8970M cannot match: a Vulkan benchmark score. The FirePro D300 posts 19,759 in Geekbench Vulkan, a test the HD 8970M does not appear in. This suggests the FirePro D300 has verified Vulkan driver support and performance, which is relevant for newer applications or workflows that leverage Vulkan for cross-platform graphics or compute.

The use-case split is therefore clear. The HD 8970M wins where raw OpenCL throughput is the priority, especially in a portable form factor. The FirePro D300 wins where professional-grade display output matters: it offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the HD 8970M’s display outputs are described as “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning they vary by laptop design. For a fixed workstation with multiple monitors, the FirePro D300 is the practical choice despite its lower compute scores.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. They also share identical transistor counts of 2,800 million and the same die size of 212 mm², resulting in the same transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The core configurations are also identical: 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs on both cards.

The chips differ in their names and generations. The HD 8970M uses the Neptune chip, part of the Solar System generation (HD 8900M). The FirePro D300 uses the Pitcairn chip, part of the FirePro Data Center generation (Dx00). This generation naming reflects their intended markets: mobile gaming versus professional workstation.

Clock speeds reveal the first significant divergence. The HD 8970M has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. The FirePro D300 has no listed base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective speed. The HD 8970M’s memory clock is 1200 MHz with 4.8 Gbps effective. These clock differences drive the compute gap: the HD 8970M reaches 2.304 TFLOPS FP32, while the FirePro D300 is slightly lower at 2.176 TFLOPS FP32.

Memory capacity is another major split. The HD 8970M carries 4 GB of GDDR5, while the FirePro D300 has only 2 GB. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the FirePro D300’s higher memory clock gives it more bandwidth: 162.6 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s. This is a rare case where the workstation card has a bandwidth advantage despite having half the memory.

Power and physical design differ sharply. The HD 8970M is rated at 100 W and uses an MXM Module slot, designed for laptops. The FirePro D300 draws 150 W, is a single-slot card, measures 242 mm or 9.5 inches in length, and requires a 450 W suggested PSU. The FirePro D300 is clearly a desktop workstation component, while the HD 8970M is a mobile part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon HD 8970M scores 21,237, defeating the AMD FirePro D300’s 19,515 by 8.8%. This is a decisive margin that reflects the HD 8970M’s higher clock speeds and larger memory allocation.

Breaking down the score, the HD 8970M’s 2.304 TFLOPS FP32 versus the FirePro D300’s 2.176 TFLOPS explains part of the gap. The 850 MHz base and 900 MHz boost clocks on the HD 8970M provide a sustained compute rate that the FirePro D300 cannot match, as it lacks listed base and boost clocks entirely. The HD 8970M also has double the memory (4 GB versus 2 GB), which helps in OpenCL workloads that buffer large datasets.

The FirePro D300’s sole benchmark win is its Vulkan score of 19,759, which the HD 8970M has no comparable result for. This is not a head-to-head test, but it does indicate that the FirePro D300’s driver stack and hardware are validated for Vulkan. In the context of the OpenCL test, however, the FirePro D300 is clearly behind: it sits 8.8% lower in raw compute.

Contextualizing these scores against their nearest rivals reinforces the hierarchy. The HD 8970M’s 21,237 is 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153) and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 (21,035), while trailing the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379) by 0.7% and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 (21,629) by 1.8%. The FirePro D300’s 19,515 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602) and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19,410), but 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765) and 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885). These deltas show both cards are competitive within their respective performance brackets, but the HD 8970M operates in a higher tier.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Radeon HD 8970M if your priority is maximum OpenCL compute performance in a mobile or compact form factor. The data is straightforward: it wins the only head-to-head test by 8.8%, has 4 GB of memory versus 2 GB, and delivers higher FP32 throughput at 2.304 TFLOPS. Its 66th percentile ranking also beats the FirePro D300’s 64th percentile. This card is for users who need portable compute power and can tolerate a 100 W TDP on an MXM module.

Pick the AMD FirePro D300 if you need a professional workstation card with verified Vulkan support and robust display connectivity. It is the only one of the two with a Vulkan benchmark score (19,759), and its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it suited for multi-monitor setups. It also offers higher memory bandwidth at 162.6 GB/s, which could benefit bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The trade-offs are significant: half the memory, 8.8% lower OpenCL score, and a 150 W TDP that requires a 450 W PSU and a 242 mm card length. This is a desktop-only solution.

There is no scenario where the FirePro D300 wins on raw compute. The HD 8970M is faster, holds more memory, and ranks higher overall. The FirePro D300’s advantages are entirely in its professional feature set—Vulkan, display outputs, and bandwidth—not in raw performance. Choose based on your workload’s API and form factor needs, not on speed alone.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8970M scores 21,237, which is 8.8% higher than the AMD FirePro D300’s 19,515 in the Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro D300 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the FirePro D300 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 19,759. The AMD Radeon HD 8970M does not have a listed Vulkan benchmark result.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8970M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD FirePro D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. Both use a 256-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for the AMD FirePro D300?

A: The FirePro D300 has a 150 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 450 W. It is a single-slot card measuring 242 mm or 9.5 inches in length.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 has higher memory bandwidth at 162.6 GB/s, compared to the AMD Radeon HD 8970M’s 153.6 GB/s, despite the HD 8970M having more memory.

Q: Are the GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 architecture, a 28 nm process from TSMC, 2,800 million transistors, a 212 mm² die size, 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | AMD FirePro D300 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Neptune | Pitcairn |

| Generation | Solar System (HD 8900M) | FirePro Data Center (Dx00) |

| Base Clock | 850 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 900 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 162.6 GB/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.304 TFLOPS | 2.176 TFLOPS |

| Pixel Rate | 28.80 GPixel/s | 27.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 72.00 GTexel/s | 68.00 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 100 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 450 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Length | Not listed | 242 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Release Date | 2013-05-13 | 2014-01-17 |

| Predecessor | London | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | Gem System | Radeon Instinct |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 21,237 | 19,515 |

| Geekbench Vulkan | Not listed | 19,759 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 66 | 64 |