GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT and AMD FirePro D300 are separated by nearly a decade of GPU architecture, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.7% of each other. The RX 6650 XT averages 19,765 points, while the FirePro D300 averages 19,637 points, a margin of just 128 points. This near-parity in aggregate scores, however, masks dramatic differences in individual workloads, with each card winning one of the two head-to-head tests by a wide margin. The data reveals a tale of two very different design philosophies: one optimized for modern graphics APIs and raw throughput, the other for legacy compute workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two directly comparable benchmark results show starkly divergent strengths. In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro D300 decisively outperforms the RX 6650 XT, scoring 19,515 versus 10,111. This represents a 48.2% advantage for the older card, a massive gap that underscores how different the two architectures handle compute tasks. The RX 6650 XT's OpenCL result is surprisingly low given its modern design, suggesting that driver optimization or architectural choices heavily favor the FirePro's GCN 1.0 compute paths in this specific test.

Conversely, the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark tells the opposite story with even greater magnitude. The RX 6650 XT scores 81,306, while the FirePro D300 manages only 19,759. This gives the RX 6650 XT a 311.5% lead, meaning it is more than four times faster in Vulkan. This result is not surprising given that Vulkan is a modern low-overhead API that leverages features like asynchronous compute and explicit memory control, which are far more mature in RDNA 2.0 than in the 2014-era GCN 1.0 design. The FirePro D300's Vulkan support is listed as version 1.2.170, but its performance clearly lags far behind what the RX 6650 XT can deliver.

Across the broader benchmark suite, the RX 6650 XT shows its dominance in DirectX and general-purpose tests. In Passmark G3D, it scores 17,166, while the FirePro D300 has no direct score for this test. The RX 6650 XT also posts strong numbers in Passmark DirectX 9 (215), DirectX 11 (169), and DirectX 10 (109), along with a GPU compute score of 7,532. The FirePro D300's benchmark data is sparse, only including the two Geekbench results, so direct comparisons are limited to those two tests. Still, the RX 6650 XT's Passmark G2D score of 918 and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,859 indicate a card that excels in modern gaming and graphics workloads.

The average benchmark score for each card masks the fact that they win in different arenas. The RX 6650 XT's 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs edges out the FirePro D300's 64th percentile, but both cards sit in the same performance tier overall. The head-to-head win count is tied at one each, but the magnitude of the Vulkan victory (311.5%) far exceeds the OpenCL margin (48.2%), suggesting the RX 6650 XT's overall capabilities are more future-proof.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural gap between these two cards is enormous. The RX 6650 XT uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture with a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the FirePro D300 relies on the Pitcairn chip using GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, also from TSMC. This process shrink from 28 nm to 7 nm allows the RX 6650 XT to pack 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The FirePro D300, by contrast, contains only 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, with a density of just 13.2 million per square millimeter.

Memory configurations diverge sharply as well. The RX 6650 XT features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro D300 offers only 2 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, yielding 162.6 GB/s. Despite having double the bus width, the older card's slower memory (1270 MHz versus 2190 MHz) means it falls far behind in raw bandwidth. The RX 6650 XT's effective memory speed of 17.5 Gbps is more than three times the FirePro's 5.1 Gbps effective rate.

Compute resources show similar disparities. The RX 6650 XT has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs), plus 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. The FirePro D300 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: the RX 6650 XT achieves 168.6 GPixel/s and 337.3 GTexel/s, while the FirePro D300 manages only 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is similarly lopsided, with the RX 6650 XT delivering 10.79 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS for the FirePro D300. The RX 6650 XT also supports FP16 at 21.59 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the FirePro D300 has no listed FP16 capability.

Interface and power characteristics also differ. The RX 6650 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro D300 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both have a suggested PSU of 450 W, but the RX 6650 XT draws 176 W TDP versus 150 W for the FirePro D300. The RX 6650 XT is dual-slot with one 8-pin power connector, while the FirePro D300 is single-slot without a specified power connector. Display outputs are HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a on the RX 6650 XT, versus four DisplayPort 1.2 connections on the FirePro D300.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 19,515, which is 48.2% higher than the RX 6650 XT's 10,111. This is the only head-to-head test the FirePro D300 wins.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6650 XT in Vulkan?

A: The RX 6650 XT scores 81,306 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 311.5% higher than the FirePro D300's 19,759. This represents a four-fold performance advantage for the newer card.

Q: Do both cards have the same average benchmark score?

A: No, the RX 6650 XT averages 19,765 points, while the FirePro D300 averages 19,637 points. The difference is 128 points, or 0.7% in favor of the RX 6650 XT.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 6650 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the FirePro D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5. The RX 6650 XT also has higher bandwidth at 280.3 GB/s versus 162.6 GB/s.

Q: Which card has ray tracing support?

A: Only the RX 6650 XT has ray tracing cores, with 32 dedicated units. The FirePro D300 has no ray tracing hardware listed.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 6650 XT uses a 7 nm TSMC process, while the FirePro D300 uses a 28 nm TSMC process. This allows the RX 6650 XT to fit 11,060 million transistors versus 2,800 million on the FirePro D300.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification category. Process node is 7 nm for the RX 6650 XT versus 28 nm for the FirePro D300. Transistor count is 11,060 million versus 2,800 million. Die size is 237 mm² versus 212 mm². Transistor density is 46.7M per mm² versus 13.2M per mm². Base clock is 2055 MHz for the RX 6650 XT, while the FirePro D300 has no listed base clock. Boost clock is 2635 MHz versus none listed. Game clock is 2410 MHz versus none. Memory clock is 2190 MHz (17.5 Gbps effective) versus 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). Memory size is 8 GB versus 2 GB. Memory type is GDDR6 versus GDDR5. Bus width is 128 bit versus 256 bit. Bandwidth is 280.3 GB/s versus 162.6 GB/s. Shading units are 2048 versus 1280. TMUs are 128 versus 80. ROPs are 64 versus 32. Ray tracing cores are 32 versus none. Pixel rate is 168.6 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 337.3 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s. FP32 is 10.79 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS. FP16 is 21.59 TFLOPS versus none. TDP is 176 W versus 150 W. Slot width is dual-slot versus single-slot. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus none. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 4x DisplayPort 1.2. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_1). Vulkan support is 1.4 versus 1.2.170. Release dates are 2022-05-09 versus 2014-01-17. The RX 6650 XT has a launch MSRP of 399 USD, while the FirePro D300 has no launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The RX 6650 XT is the superior card for any modern graphics workload, as evidenced by its 311.5% lead in Vulkan and its massive advantages in pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute. Its 8 GB memory capacity, ray tracing support, and DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set make it suitable for contemporary gaming and content creation. The FirePro D300, however, retains a significant edge in OpenCL compute, winning that benchmark by 48.2%. This suggests that legacy compute applications that rely heavily on OpenCL may still favor the older card. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, but the RX 6650 XT's wins are in more demanding and relevant tests. Buyers should choose the RX 6650 XT for general-purpose use, gaming, or modern API workloads. The FirePro D300 should only be considered for specific OpenCL-bound tasks where its 48.2% advantage matters.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6650 XT dominates in Vulkan-based applications, gaming, and any workload that leverages modern DirectX features. Its 311.5% Vulkan lead over the FirePro D300 makes it the obvious choice for users running Vulkan games or compute applications. The card's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth also give it an advantage in texture-heavy scenes and large datasets. Its ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support make it future-proof for upcoming titles.

The FirePro D300 wins exclusively in OpenCL compute, where its 19,515 score beats the RX 6650 XT by 48.2%. This makes it relevant for older scientific, engineering, or financial applications that are optimized for OpenCL and do not benefit from modern graphics APIs. Its single-slot design and lower 150 W TDP also make it easier to fit into dense server or workstation chassis. However, its 2 GB memory limit and lack of ray tracing support severely constrain its usefulness in modern contexts. The FirePro D300's 256-bit bus offers wider memory paths, but the slower GDDR5 memory negates this advantage. For users running OpenCL-heavy workloads on legacy software, the FirePro D300 remains a viable option, but for everything else, the RX 6650 XT is the clear winner.