AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and AMD FirePro D300 are two very different GPUs from different eras, and the benchmark data reflects a clear, if not always dramatic, hierarchy. Across the two head-to-head tests, the RX Vega M GL secures a narrow victory in OpenCL and a dominant one in Vulkan, making it the overall performance winner. The FirePro D300, a workstation part from an older generation, remains competitive in compute but falls significantly behind in modern graphics API workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL scores 22,757 points against the FirePro D300's 19,759 points. This is a 15.2% advantage for the Vega M GL, a substantial margin that highlights the newer architecture's superior efficiency in modern, low-level graphics APIs. The Vega M GL's Vulkan score is its strongest benchmark result and represents a clear generational leap over the older GCN 1.0 design.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the results are far closer. The RX Vega M GL scores 19,549, while the FirePro D300 scores 19,515, a difference of only 0.2%. This effectively makes the two GPUs equivalent in raw compute workloads that rely on OpenCL. The FirePro D300, despite its older architecture, holds its own here, demonstrating that its compute capabilities were well-optimized for its time. The data shows that for applications leveraging OpenCL, the choice between these two is largely immaterial in terms of performance.

Looking at the overall average benchmark scores, the RX Vega M GL leads with an average of 21,153 versus 19,637 for the FirePro D300. This puts the Vega M GL in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro D300 sits in the 64th percentile. The gap in average scores is driven almost entirely by the Vulkan result, reinforcing that the Vega M GL's advantage is primarily in graphics, not general compute.

The nearest rivals for each GPU further contextualize their performance. The RX Vega M GL's average score of 21,153 places it just 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21,237) and 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 (21,035). It also trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379) by 1.1% but beats the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20,713) by 2.1%. For the FirePro D300, its average of 19,637 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602) and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19,410), while sitting 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765) and 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885). This shows the FirePro D300 is competitively positioned in its performance tier, even against much newer consumer cards.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL has a higher average benchmark score of 21,153, compared to the AMD FirePro D300's 19,637.

Q: How significant is the difference in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX Vega M GL scores 22,757 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 15.2% higher than the FirePro D300's score of 19,759. This is the largest performance gap between the two GPUs.

Q: Are the two GPUs similar in OpenCL compute performance?

A: Yes, they are nearly identical. The RX Vega M GL scores 19,549 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the FirePro D300 scores 19,515, a difference of just 0.2%.

Q: How does the FirePro D300 compare to the NVIDIA Quadro K5200?

A: The FirePro D300 has an average score of 19,637, which is 0.2% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K5200's average score of 19,602.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of the RX Vega M GL among all GPUs?

A: The RX Vega M GL is in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro D300 is in the 64th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RX Vega M GL has a memory bandwidth of 179.2 GB/s, which is higher than the FirePro D300's 162.6 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL uses the Polaris 22 chip based on the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It integrates 5,000 million transistors on a die size of 208 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 24.0 million per mm². In contrast, the AMD FirePro D300 uses the Pitcairn chip based on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process by TSMC. It contains 2,800 million transistors on a slightly larger die of 212 mm², yielding a lower transistor density of 13.2 million per mm². This generational shift from 28 nm to 14 nm is a primary driver of the performance differences.

Memory architecture also diverges significantly. The RX Vega M GL features 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro D300 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 162.6 GB/s. While the capacity and bus width differ, the bandwidth figures are relatively close, though the Vega M GL still holds the advantage. The core configurations are identical in count, with both GPUs featuring 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. However, clock speeds differ, with the RX Vega M GL running at a base of 931 MHz and a boost of 1011 MHz, while the FirePro D300's base and boost clocks are not specified in the data.

Feature support and API compatibility further separate the two. The RX Vega M GL supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The FirePro D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The newer Vulkan revision on the Vega M GL is a notable advantage. The FirePro D300 also supports FP16 compute, while this is not listed for the Vega M GL. The FirePro D300 is a single-slot card with a 450 W suggested PSU and four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the RX Vega M GL is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with portable device-dependent display outputs.

The Verdict

The data strongly favors the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL for users who prioritize modern graphics performance. Its 15.2% lead in Vulkan benchmarks is decisive and indicates a much better experience in current games and applications that use this API. The Vega M GL also has a higher average benchmark score (21,153 vs 19,637) and a higher percentile ranking (66th vs 64th). For any workload that leverages Vulkan, the RX Vega M GL is the clear choice based on benchmark results.

The AMD FirePro D300, however, is not obsolete in compute tasks. Its OpenCL score is virtually tied with the RX Vega M GL, differing by only 0.2%. This means that for OpenCL-based workloads, the two GPUs are interchangeable in terms of performance. The FirePro D300's workstation heritage is evident in its single-slot design, four DisplayPort outputs, and a 450 W suggested PSU, which may make it more suitable for specific professional environments that require those physical characteristics. However, its older architecture and lower Vulkan performance make it a less future-proof option.

From a pure performance standpoint, the RX Vega M GL wins two out of two head-to-head benchmarks and has the superior average score. The FirePro D300's only saving grace is its competitive OpenCL performance, but it cannot match the Vega M GL's overall capability. The verdict is straightforward: the RX Vega M GL is the better-performing GPU, while the FirePro D300 remains a viable choice only for specific OpenCL compute scenarios where its form factor or display outputs are required.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specifications where the two GPUs differ, based solely on the provided data:

• Chip: Polaris 22 vs Pitcairn
• Architecture: GCN 4.0 vs GCN 1.0
• Process Node: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries vs TSMC
• Transistors: 5,000 million vs 2,800 million
• Die Size: 208 mm² vs 212 mm²
• Transistor Density: 24.0M / mm² vs 13.2M / mm²
• Memory Size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Memory Type: HBM2 vs GDDR5
• Memory Bus Width: 1024 bit vs 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 179.2 GB/s vs 162.6 GB/s
• FP32 Performance: 2.588 TFLOPS vs 2.176 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 2.588 TFLOPS (1:1) vs Not specified
• TDP: 65 W vs 150 W
• Slot Width: IGP vs Single-slot
• Suggested PSU: Not specified vs 450 W
• Bus Interface: IGP vs PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent vs 4x DisplayPort 1.2
• Vulkan Support: 1.3 vs 1.2.170
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_0) vs 12 (11_1)
• Release Date: 2018-01-31 vs 2014-01-17

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL is the unequivocal winner in graphics-intensive scenarios. Its 15.2% lead in the Vulkan benchmark demonstrates superior performance in modern games and applications that use this API. The Vega M GL also wins in raw compute throughput, boasting 2.588 TFLOPS of FP32 performance compared to the FirePro D300's 2.176 TFLOPS. Its higher memory bandwidth (179.2 GB/s vs 162.6 GB/s) and double the memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB) further reinforce its advantage in texture-heavy and large-dataset workloads. For any user building a system around an IGP or requiring a low-power (65 W TDP) solution with strong modern graphics, the RX Vega M GL is the superior choice.

The AMD FirePro D300's wins are more situational. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it nearly matches the RX Vega M GL, with a score of 19,515 versus 19,549. This makes it a viable option for compute workloads that are specifically optimized for OpenCL and do not benefit from the newer Vulkan API. Its professional feature set is also a differentiator: the single-slot form factor and four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it suitable for multi-display professional setups that require multiple high-resolution monitors from a single card. The FirePro D300's predecessor is "FirePro Terascale" and its successor is "Radeon Instinct," indicating its lineage in the professional compute space. For users with legacy OpenCL-only applications or specific workstation display requirements, the FirePro D300 can still be a relevant choice, despite its older architecture and higher 150 W TDP.