AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD Radeon RX 560X Comparison

The AMD FirePro D300 and AMD Radeon RX 560X are two very different products from the same manufacturer, separated by over four years of GPU architecture evolution. Benchmark data shows a split decision: the older FirePro D300 leads in OpenCL compute, while the newer RX 560X counters in Vulkan. The FirePro D300 averages a 5.4% higher overall benchmark score (19637 vs 18626), yet the RX 560X holds its own in a specific API workload. This comparison is not a clean generational sweep — it is a nuanced trade-off between raw compute throughput and modern API efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single most decisive result in this matchup is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD FirePro D300 wins outright. It scores 19515 against the RX 560X’s 17020, a 14.7% advantage for the older card. This is a substantial gap, indicating that the FirePro D300’s wider memory bus and higher shading unit count translate directly into compute performance. In raw FP32 throughput, the FirePro D300 delivers 2.176 TFLOPS, while the RX 560X pushes 2.611 TFLOPS — yet the FirePro still wins OpenCL by a wide margin. This suggests that memory bandwidth (162.6 GB/s vs 112.0 GB/s) plays a decisive role in this workload, as the FirePro D300’s 256-bit bus provides 45% more bandwidth than the RX 560X’s 128-bit interface.

The Vulkan benchmark flips the script. Here, the AMD Radeon RX 560X scores 20231, edging out the FirePro D300’s 19759 — a modest 2.3% lead. While this is a smaller margin than the OpenCL gap, it is significant because Vulkan is a modern, low-overhead API that favors newer architectures. The RX 560X’s GCN 4.0 architecture supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro D300’s GCN 1.0 only reaches Vulkan 1.2.170. The newer card’s higher boost clock (1275 MHz vs no boost clock listed for the FirePro) and 1:1 FP16 support likely contribute to this win, even though the FirePro D300 has more shading units (1280 vs 1024).

Looking at the broader context, the FirePro D300’s average benchmark score of 19637 places it at the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 560X sits at the 62nd percentile with an average of 18626. This 5.4% overall gap is driven entirely by the OpenCL result. The nearest rivals for each card confirm their positioning: the FirePro D300 is within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19410) and 0.6% of the RX 6650 XT (19765), while the RX 560X is within 0.9% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (18789) and 0.3% of the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18685). These deltas show that despite its age, the FirePro D300 remains competitive with much newer hardware in compute-heavy synthetic tests.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro D300 is the clear winner in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 14.7% lead in this benchmark makes it the better choice for applications that rely on OpenCL for general-purpose GPU computing, such as scientific simulation, data processing, or older compute frameworks. The card’s 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 162.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for memory-bound compute tasks. Its 1280 shading units and 32 ROPs also contribute to a pixel rate of 27.20 GPixel/s, which is 33% higher than the RX 560X’s 20.40 GPixel/s. For users whose primary workload is OpenCL-based, the FirePro D300’s performance is simply superior, despite its older architecture.

The AMD Radeon RX 560X wins in Vulkan-based workloads, though by a smaller margin. Its 2.3% advantage in the Vulkan benchmark reflects better support for modern graphics APIs, including Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the FirePro D300’s DirectX 12 (11_1). The RX 560X also offers double the memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB), which is an advantage for larger textures and datasets, even if its bandwidth is lower at 112.0 GB/s. Its FP16 throughput of 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1) is a feature the FirePro D300 lacks entirely, making the RX 560X more suitable for workloads that leverage half-precision math. The RX 560X also has a higher texture rate (81.60 GTexel/s vs 68.00 GTexel/s), which benefits texture-heavy rendering tasks.

Beyond raw scores, the RX 560X wins on efficiency and power. Its 75 W TDP is exactly half of the FirePro D300’s 150 W, and it requires only a 250 W suggested PSU compared to 450 W. This makes the RX 560X dramatically easier to integrate into existing systems without a PSU upgrade. The RX 560X is also shorter at 170 mm (6.7 inches) versus the FirePro D300’s 242 mm (9.5 inches), offering greater compatibility with compact cases. The newer card’s display outputs include HDMI 2.0b and DisplayPort 1.4a, which are more modern than the FirePro D300’s four DisplayPort 1.2 connections.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark, representing a major generational leap in GPU design. The AMD FirePro D300 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process at TSMC, featuring the Pitcairn chip. It packs 2,800 million transistors onto a 212 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 560X uses GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with the Polaris 21 chip. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter — an 85% improvement in density that enables higher clock speeds and better efficiency.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The FirePro D300 uses a 256-bit memory bus with 2 GB of GDDR5, while the RX 560X uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5. This explains the bandwidth disparity: 162.6 GB/s for the FirePro versus 112.0 GB/s for the RX 560X. The RX 560X compensates with faster memory clocks (1750 MHz / 7 Gbps effective) versus the FirePro’s 1270 MHz / 5.1 Gbps effective, but the wider bus still wins on total bandwidth. The RX 560X’s memory runs at a higher frequency, but the FirePro’s bus width provides a 45% bandwidth advantage.

Compute unit configurations differ significantly. The FirePro D300 has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the RX 560X has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. This gives the FirePro D300 a 25% advantage in shading units and a 100% advantage in ROPs, which explains its higher pixel rate (27.20 vs 20.40 GPixel/s). However, the RX 560X has higher clock speeds: 1175 MHz base and 1275 MHz boost, whereas the FirePro D300 lists no base or boost clocks for the core, only memory clocks. This clock advantage helps the RX 560X achieve a higher texture rate (81.60 vs 68.00 GTexel/s) and higher FP32 throughput (2.611 vs 2.176 TFLOPS).

The API support also reflects their eras. The FirePro D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 560X also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, a feature absent from the FirePro D300. The bus interface differs as well: the FirePro D300 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 560X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which could impact bandwidth in some scenarios but rarely bottlenecks either card in practice.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher average benchmark performance?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 has an average benchmark score of 19637, which is 5.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 560X’s 18626. The FirePro D300 also ranks higher at the 64th percentile of all GPUs versus the RX 560X’s 62nd percentile.

Q: Why does the FirePro D300 win OpenCL despite having lower FP32 throughput?

A: The FirePro D300 has a 256-bit memory bus providing 162.6 GB/s bandwidth, versus the RX 560X’s 128-bit bus at 112.0 GB/s. This 45% bandwidth advantage, combined with 1280 shading units, gives it a 14.7% lead in the OpenCL benchmark (19515 vs 17020).

Q: Does the RX 560X support newer APIs than the FirePro D300?

A: Yes. The RX 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro D300 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. This contributes to the RX 560X’s 2.3% win in the Vulkan benchmark (20231 vs 19759).

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The FirePro D300 has a 150 W TDP and requires a 450 W suggested PSU, while the RX 560X has a 75 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU. The RX 560X also uses no power connectors, whereas the FirePro D300’s connector configuration is not listed.

Q: How do their memory capacities compare?

A: The RX 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the FirePro D300’s 2 GB. However, the FirePro D300 has a wider 256-bit bus, giving it higher bandwidth (162.6 GB/s vs 112.0 GB/s).

Q: Which card is physically smaller?

A: The RX 560X is 170 mm (6.7 inches) long, while the FirePro D300 is 242 mm (9.5 inches). The RX 560X is also a dual-slot card, while the FirePro D300 is single-slot.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for different use cases. If your workload is dominated by OpenCL compute, the AMD FirePro D300 is the stronger card. Its 14.7% lead in that benchmark, driven by superior memory bandwidth and more shading units, makes it the right pick for compute-centric applications. The 64th percentile ranking and proximity to much newer cards like the RX 6650 XT (within 0.6%) and RX 7900 XTX (within 1.2%) show that its compute performance remains relevant despite being end-of-life since 2014.

If your priority is modern API support, efficiency, or memory capacity, the AMD Radeon RX 560X is the better choice. Its Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) support, plus FP16 capability, make it more future-proof for current software. The 2.3% Vulkan win, combined with double the memory (4 GB vs 2 GB), a 75 W TDP, and a smaller footprint, makes it the more practical card for general-purpose use. Its 62nd percentile ranking and proximity to the RTX 2070 (within 0.9%) underscore its competitive position.

The FirePro D300 wins on compute density and bandwidth; the RX 560X wins on efficiency, capacity, and API modernity. Neither card dominates the other broadly — the split is nearly even at one benchmark win each. Pick the FirePro D300 for raw OpenCL muscle, or the RX 560X for a balanced, low-power solution with better software compatibility. The 5.4% overall score gap favors the FirePro D300, but the RX 560X’s advantages in power, memory, and API support may outweigh that in real-world scenarios.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro D300 | AMD Radeon RX 560X |

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

| Chip | Pitcairn | Polaris 21 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 2,800 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 212 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 1175 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1275 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz / 5.1 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz / 7 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 162.6 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 80 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 27.20 GPixel/s | 20.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 68.00 GTexel/s | 81.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.176 TFLOPS | 2.611 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |

| Length | 242 mm / 9.5 inches | 170 mm / 6.7 inches |

| Release Date | 2014-01-17 | 2018-04-10 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | Polaris |

| Successor | Radeon Instinct | Vega |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |