AMD FirePro D300 vs Intel Arc B580 Comparison

The Intel Arc B580 and AMD FirePro D300 represent two very different moments in GPU history. The Arc B580 is an active, current-generation Battlemage part built for modern workloads, while the FirePro D300 is an end-of-life workstation card from the GCN 1.0 era. The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap, but the comparison still reveals distinct use cases for each card.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B580 wins every single benchmark in the database’s head-to-head comparison. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc B580 scores 92,821 against the FirePro D300’s 19,515, a delta of 375.6% in favor of Intel. In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin is even larger: the Arc B580 posts 109,672 versus 19,759, a 455% advantage. There are no benchmark categories where the FirePro D300 comes out ahead in this matchup.

The Arc B580’s wins are not narrow. The 455% Vulkan delta means the Intel card delivers more than five times the compute throughput in that test. The OpenCL result is similarly lopsided. For any application that relies on general-purpose GPU compute, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the Arc B580 is the only viable option in this pairing.

The FirePro D300’s strengths are not reflected in the benchmark data, as it wins zero head-to-head tests. However, its physical and architectural profile suggests a different purpose. It is a single-slot, 150 W card with four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, designed for dense workstation installations where space and power constraints matter more than raw throughput. It draws 40 W less than the Arc B580’s 190 W TDP, and its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is a generation older but wider than the Arc B580’s PCIe 4.0 x8 link. The FirePro D300 also carries 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, versus 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus for the Arc B580.

The Arc B580’s transistor density tells the story of its generational leap. It packs 19,600 million transistors into a 272 mm² die at TSMC’s 5 nm node, yielding 72.1M transistors per mm². The FirePro D300 uses 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die at 28 nm, for a density of 13.2M per mm². That is a 5.5x difference in transistor density, which explains why the Arc B580 can sustain 2,560 shading units at 2,670 MHz while the FirePro D300 manages 1,280 shading units at unspecified clocks.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity. The Intel Arc B580 is the superior card in every measurable category. It wins 2 of 2 head-to-head benchmarks, and its average benchmark score of 23,021 places it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the FirePro D300’s 19,637 average and 64th percentile. The Arc B580’s 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is more than six times the FirePro D300’s 2.176 TFLOPS. Its 456.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth dwarfs the FirePro D300’s 162.6 GB/s. Its 12 GB frame buffer is six times larger. Its pixel rate of 213.6 GPixel/s is nearly eight times the FirePro D300’s 27.20 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 427.2 GTexel/s is more than six times the older card’s 68.00 GTexel/s.

The Arc B580 also supports modern APIs that the FirePro D300 cannot use. Intel’s card offers DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, plus 20 dedicated ray tracing cores. The FirePro D300 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, with no ray tracing hardware at all. The Arc B580 supports HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the FirePro D300 is stuck with four DisplayPort 1.2 connections.

The FirePro D300’s only advantages are physical and legacy-oriented. It is a single-slot card with a 150 W TDP, making it easier to install in tight chassis. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 connection, which is more compatible with older motherboards than the Arc B580’s PCIe 4.0 x8. It is also an end-of-life product, which may matter for organizations with existing FirePro Terascale ecosystems or Radeon Instinct upgrade paths. None of these factors close the performance gap. For anyone choosing between these two cards today, the Arc B580 is the clear pick unless the workload specifically requires a low-profile, single-slot form factor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head tests, and both are landslides. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc B580 scores 92,821. The FirePro D300 scores 19,515. The delta is 375.6% in favor of Intel. This test stresses raw compute across a variety of workloads, and the Arc B580’s 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs simply overwhelm the FirePro D300’s 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is even more one-sided. The Arc B580 posts 109,672, while the FirePro D300 manages 19,759. That is a 455% delta, meaning the Intel card is roughly 5.5 times faster in this API. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that rewards modern hardware with efficient command processing and high memory bandwidth. The Arc B580’s 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth and 19 Gbps effective memory speed give it a massive edge over the FirePro D300’s 162.6 GB/s and 5.1 Gbps effective GDDR5.

The Arc B580’s broader benchmark portfolio reinforces these results. In PassMark G3D, it scores 15,748. In PassMark GPU Compute, it scores 7,729. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 3,068. The FirePro D300 has no comparable scores in the database, only the two Geekbench results, which limits direct cross-test comparisons. Still, the Arc B580’s average benchmark score of 23,021 sits within 1% of the NVIDIA RTX 3080 (23,172), within 0.6% of the RTX 2080 (22,895), and 0.2% below the Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23,061). The FirePro D300’s average of 19,637 is 0.2% above the Quadro K5200 (19,602) and 1.2% above the RX 7900 XTX (19,410), though that last delta reflects the D300’s narrow score distribution rather than any real equivalence.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc B580 offers 456.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, while the AMD FirePro D300 offers 162.6 GB/s from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Does the FirePro D300 support ray tracing?

A: No. The FirePro D300 has no ray tracing cores, while the Arc B580 includes 20 dedicated RT cores.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The FirePro D300 has a lower TDP at 150 W versus the Arc B580’s 190 W, but the Arc B580 delivers far more performance per watt given its 375.6% OpenCL and 455% Vulkan leads.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each card in the database?

A: The Arc B580’s nearest rivals are the Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23,061, -0.2% delta), RTX 2080 (22,895, 0.6%), RTX 3080 (23,172, -0.7%), and P106-100 (23,249, -1%). The FirePro D300’s nearest rivals are the Quadro K5200 (19,602, 0.2%), Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765, -0.6%), RX 7900 XTX (19,410, 1.2%), and Tesla K40m (19,885, -1.2%).

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The Arc B580 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro D300 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Which card is still in production?

A: The Intel Arc B580 is active in production, while the AMD FirePro D300 is end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different architectural eras. The Arc B580 uses Intel’s Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G21 chip, part of the Battlemage generation. The FirePro D300 uses AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture on the Pitcairn chip, from the FirePro Data Center Dx00 generation. The Arc B580 is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, while the FirePro D300 uses TSMC’s 28 nm node. That process gap explains the transistor count disparity: 19,600 million transistors on the Arc B580’s 272 mm² die versus 2,800 million on the FirePro D300’s 212 mm² die.

The Arc B580’s Xe2-HPG design includes 2,560 shading units operating at a boost clock of 2,670 MHz, which is also its base clock. The FirePro D300’s 1,280 shading units run at unspecified base and boost clocks. The Intel card has 160 TMUs and 80 ROPs, compared to 80 TMUs and 32 ROPs for AMD. Memory speeds differ sharply as well: the Arc B580 runs GDDR6 at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed, while the FirePro D300 runs GDDR5 at 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective.

The Arc B580 also has 20 ray tracing cores and supports FP16 compute at 27.34 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature the FirePro D300 lacks entirely. The Intel card lists no tensor cores, and neither card lists any dedicated AI acceleration hardware. The Arc B580’s FP32 output is 13.69 TFLOPS, versus 2.176 TFLOPS for the FirePro D300.

Form factors and connectivity differ just as much. The Arc B580 is a dual-slot card measuring 272 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 45 mm in width, requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a 450 W power supply. The FirePro D300 is a single-slot card at 242 mm long, with no listed height or width, and no power connector listed, also requiring a 450 W PSU. Display output is another differentiator: the Arc B580 has one HDMI 2.1a port and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the FirePro D300 offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

The bus interface also moves forward. The Arc B580 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro D300 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The older card’s wider physical lane count does not compensate for the newer standard’s higher per-lane bandwidth, and the Arc B580’s massive memory bandwidth advantage further reduces any PCIe bottleneck. The FirePro D300’s successor is listed as Radeon Instinct, while the Arc B580’s predecessor is Alchemist, and the Arc B580’s launch MSRP is 249 USD. The production status confirms the split: the Arc B580 is active, the FirePro D300 is end-of-life.