AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD Radeon Pro 460 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear, consistent winner in direct comparisons. The AMD FirePro D300 outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 460 in every shared test recorded in the database. This is not a marginal victory; the margins are substantial and consistent across different API workloads.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the FirePro D300 records a score of 19,515, while the Radeon Pro 460 achieves 15,284. This translates to a 27.7% advantage for the FirePro D300. This is a decisive lead, indicating that the older workstation card handles general-purpose compute workloads with significantly more efficiency. The 27.7% delta is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any test, making it the headline result of this comparison.

The Vulkan benchmark shows a similar, though slightly narrower, outcome. The FirePro D300 scores 19,759, whereas the Radeon Pro 460 scores 16,816. The resulting delta is 17.5% in favor of the FirePro D300. While the gap is smaller than in OpenCL, it is still a commanding lead. This suggests the FirePro D300's architecture handles modern graphics API workloads with greater ease, despite its older generation.

The averages tell the same story. The FirePro D300 has an average benchmark score of 19,637 across all its recorded tests. The Radeon Pro 460, despite having more tests in the database, including a very strong Metal score, has a lower average of 17,509. The difference in average performance is a direct consequence of the FirePro D300's victories in the two shared tests.

It is also worth noting the context of these scores within the database. The FirePro D300 sits at the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 460 sits at the 61st percentile. While both are mid-pack performers, the FirePro D300 is consistently ranked higher. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K5200, has an average score of 19,602, which is nearly identical (0.2% delta), placing the FirePro D300 in the same performance tier as that professional workstation card. The Radeon Pro 460, on the other hand, is nearest to the NVIDIA Tesla K40c, which scores 17,468, again a negligible 0.2% delta. The data places these two AMD cards in different performance classes.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD FirePro D300 is the superior performer for raw compute and graphics tasks. It wins both head-to-head matchups with significant margins. Its average score is 12.2% higher than the Radeon Pro 460's average, and it holds a higher percentile ranking. Users who prioritize raw processing power in OpenCL and Vulkan applications should choose the FirePro D300.

The Radeon Pro 460 is not without its merits, but its strengths do not lie in the common benchmarks shared with the FirePro D300. Its only recorded advantage is in the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 20,426. However, the FirePro D300 has no corresponding Metal score in the database, so a direct comparison on that API is impossible. In the two tests where both cards have results, the FirePro D300 is the clear winner. For users working in environments that rely on Metal, the Radeon Pro 460 has a demonstrated capability. For OpenCL and Vulkan, the FirePro D300 is the definitive winner.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent different eras of AMD's graphics architecture. The FirePro D300 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture and uses the Pitcairn chip. The Radeon Pro 460 uses the newer GCN 4.0 architecture with the Baffin chip. This difference is also reflected in their manufacturing processes. The FirePro D300 is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon Pro 460 is built on a more advanced 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries.

The process node difference leads to significant variations in transistor density. The FirePro D300 packs 2,800 million transistors onto a die size of 212 mm², resulting in a density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro 460, despite having a slightly higher total transistor count of 3,000 million, fits them onto a much smaller die of 123 mm². This results in a much higher density of 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter.

The architectural differences extend to API support. The FirePro D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Radeon Pro 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The Radeon Pro 460's newer architecture allows for a newer, more complete implementation of these APIs. The FirePro D300 is listed as having no FP16 performance, while the Radeon Pro 460 has FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with its FP32 performance. The FirePro D300 is a data center part, while the Radeon Pro 460 is designed for mobile Macs, as indicated by its "IGP" slot width and "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ significantly in their core configurations and memory subsystems. The FirePro D300 has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). The Radeon Pro 460 has fewer of each: 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This disparity in core resources directly explains the FirePro D300's performance lead in compute and fill-rate tasks.

The memory configurations are also distinct. The FirePro D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. The Radeon Pro 460 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, offering double the capacity. However, the memory buses are different. The FirePro D300 uses a 256-bit bus, while the Radeon Pro 460 uses a 128-bit bus. This results in the FirePro D300 having a much higher memory bandwidth of 162.6 GB/s, compared to the Radeon Pro 460's 81.28 GB/s. The Radeon Pro 460 offers more memory, but the FirePro D300 provides much faster memory.

The power characteristics are drastically different. The FirePro D300 has a TDP of 150 W. The Radeon Pro 460 has a TDP of just 35 W. This reflects the FirePro D300's a workstation card and the Radeon Pro 460's mobile design. The FirePro D300 requires a 450 W power supply, while the Radeon Pro 460 needs none. The FirePro D300 is a single-slot card and has 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Radeon Pro 460 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), has no power connectors, and its display outputs are dependent on the portable device it is installed in.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 has a higher average benchmark score of 19,637, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 460's average of 17,509.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD FirePro D300 have its largest lead over the Radeon Pro 460?

A: The FirePro D300's largest lead is in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 19,515 against the Radeon Pro 460's 15,284, a 27.7% difference.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 460 win any head-to-head benchmark against the FirePro D300?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the FirePro D300 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The Radeon Pro 460 has zero head-to-head wins.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth and what is the difference?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 has higher memory bandwidth at 162.6 GB/s, while the AMD Radeon Pro 460 has 81.28 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU is fabricated using a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 460 is fabricated on a 14 nm process, while the AMD FirePro D300 is fabricated on a 28 nm process.

Q: What are the DirectX versions supported by each GPU?

A: The FirePro D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the Radeon Pro 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results create a clear split in suitability for different tasks.

AMD FirePro D300 Wins in:

• Raw Compute (OpenCL): The 27.7% lead in OpenCL makes this the primary use case. It is suited for general-purpose GPU computing tasks that leverage OpenCL, such as scientific simulation or data processing.
• Modern Graphics API (Vulkan): With a 17.5% lead in Vulkan, it is better for applications using this cross-platform graphics API.
• High-Resolution Texturing: Its 256-bit memory bus and 162.6 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial advantage in memory-intensive tasks.
• Pixel Fill Rate: The 32 ROPs and 27.20 GPixel/s pixel rate are double that of the Radeon Pro 460, making it better for tasks involving high-resolution rendering.

AMD Radeon Pro 460 Wins in:

• Memory Capacity: The 4 GB VRAM is double the FirePro D300's 2 GB. This makes it more suitable for workloads that require a larger working set of data in memory, even if the data transfer is slower.
• Power Efficiency: The 35 W TDP is a fraction of the 150 W TDP of the FirePro D300. This makes it the only practical choice for mobile or integrated systems.
• Newer API Support: It has a newer Vulkan version (1.3) and DirectX 12 (12_0) feature level.
• Apple Metal (Potential): The Radeon Pro 460 has a recorded Metal score of 20,426. The FirePro D300 has no Metal score in the database, so the Radeon Pro 460 is the only one of the two that demonstrably supports this API.