AMD FirePro D300 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB Comparison

The AMD FirePro D300 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB are two end-of-life graphics cards from different eras, built on fundamentally different architectures. The benchmark data reveals a split decision: the GTX 1060 dominates in OpenCL compute workloads, while the FirePro D300 counters with a notable Vulkan advantage. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, architectural contrasts, and the specific use cases where each card holds the edge.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB scores 27,001 against the AMD FirePro D300’s 19,515. That is a 27.7% margin in favor of the GTX 1060, representing the largest performance gap between the two cards in any shared benchmark. The FirePro D300’s score places it closer to rivals like the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602) and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765), while the GTX 1060’s OpenCL result sits in a higher tier, suggesting significantly better raw compute throughput in this API. The delta is stark: the GTX 1060 delivers roughly 38% more OpenCL performance than the FirePro D300 in absolute terms.

However, the Vulkan benchmark flips the script. Here, the AMD FirePro D300 scores 19,759, edging out the GTX 1060’s 17,475 by 13.1%. This is a substantial victory for the older AMD card, indicating that its GCN 1.0 architecture handles Vulkan workloads more efficiently than the Pascal-based GTX 1060 in this specific test. The FirePro D300’s Vulkan score is actually higher than its OpenCL score (19,759 vs 19,515), while the GTX 1060’s Vulkan score (17,475) is dramatically lower than its OpenCL result (27,001). This suggests the GTX 1060’s OpenCL performance is its strong suit, whereas the FirePro D300 shows more balanced—and in Vulkan, superior—performance.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the two cards are nearly inseparable. The FirePro D300 has an average score of 19,637, while the GTX 1060 3 GB averages 19,334. That puts the FirePro D300 just 1.6% ahead overall, a margin well within noise. Both cards share the same 64th percentile ranking among all GPUs, reinforcing that they occupy the same performance tier despite their very different architectural approaches. The nearest rivals for the FirePro D300 include the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19,410, +1.2% delta) and NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885, -1.2% delta), while the GTX 1060’s rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN Xp (19,177, +0.8% delta) and GeForce GTX 780 (19,164, +0.9% delta). These comparisons show both cards sitting in a dense cluster of mid-to-high-end GPUs, with no clear overall winner.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent distinct generations of GPU design. The AMD FirePro D300 uses the Pitcairn chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB uses the GP106 chip with Pascal architecture, built on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 28 nm vs 16 nm means the GTX 1060 packs 4,400 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, while the FirePro D300 fits 2,800 million transistors into a slightly larger 212 mm² die. This gives the GTX 1060 a much higher transistor density—22.0 million per mm² compared to 13.2 million per mm² for the FirePro D300.

Core configurations differ notably. The FirePro D300 has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). The GTX 1060 counters with 1,152 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Despite having fewer shaders and TMUs, the GTX 1060 achieves dramatically higher fill rates: 81.98 GPixel/s pixel rate and 123.0 GTexel/s texture rate, versus the FirePro D300’s 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s. The GTX 1060’s FP32 performance is also far higher at 3.935 TFLOPS compared to 2.176 TFLOPS, a 81% advantage in raw floating-point throughput. Interestingly, the GTX 1060 lists FP16 performance at 61.49 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), indicating severely handicapped half-precision compute, while the FirePro D300’s FP16 data is not provided.

Memory subsystems also diverge. The FirePro D300 comes with 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 162.6 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1060 offers 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, but with faster effective memory clocks (8 Gbps vs 5.1 Gbps), achieving 192.2 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1060 thus has both more capacity and higher bandwidth, a clear advantage for texture-heavy or large-dataset workloads. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the GTX 1060 has a base clock of 1506 MHz and boost clock of 1708 MHz, while the FirePro D300’s base and boost clocks are not listed in the data, only a memory clock of 1270 MHz.

Power and physical characteristics differ as well. The FirePro D300 has a TDP of 150 W and requires a 450 W suggested PSU, while the GTX 1060 is more efficient at 120 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU. The FirePro D300 is a single-slot card measuring 242 mm in length, while the GTX 1060 is dual-slot and slightly longer at 250 mm. The FirePro D300 offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the GTX 1060 provides one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The GTX 1060 also lists a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the FirePro D300’s connector configuration is not specified.

API support shows generational differences. The FirePro D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 1060 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and a newer Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference (11_1 vs 12_1) is notable, with the GTX 1060 offering more modern DX12 features. Both cards use PCIe 3.0 x16 interfaces and are produced by TSMC, but their release dates are separated by roughly two and a half years, with the FirePro D300 launching in January 2014 and the GTX 1060 in August 2016.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB is the clear choice for OpenCL-based compute workloads. Its 27,001 OpenCL score is not only 27.7% ahead of the FirePro D300, but also positions it above many higher-end GPUs in the rival list, including the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19,410) and NVIDIA TITAN Xp (19,177). The GTX 1060’s higher FP32 throughput (3.935 TFLOPS vs 2.176 TFLOPS), higher pixel and texture rates, and greater memory bandwidth (192.2 GB/s vs 162.6 GB/s) all support this dominance in raw compute and fill-rate-bound tasks. For general-purpose GPU computing, scientific simulations, or any application leveraging OpenCL, the GTX 1060 is the superior option.

The AMD FirePro D300 wins in Vulkan performance, posting a 13.1% higher score than the GTX 1060 in that API. This is particularly interesting given the FirePro D300’s older GCN 1.0 architecture and lower raw specs. The 19,759 Vulkan score suggests the FirePro D300’s driver implementation or architectural efficiency in Vulkan is strong, making it a viable option for Vulkan-based games or applications despite its age. The FirePro D300 also has a slight edge in average benchmark score (19,637 vs 19,334), meaning that across all measured workloads, it comes out marginally ahead. Its single-slot form factor and four DisplayPort outputs also make it more suitable for multi-display professional setups where space is at a premium.

For gaming scenarios, the GTX 1060’s higher memory capacity (3 GB vs 2 GB) and faster effective memory speed provide a practical advantage, especially for modern titles with larger texture budgets. The GTX 1060’s superior fill rates and pixel throughput (81.98 GPixel/s vs 27.20 GPixel/s) should translate to better performance at higher resolutions and detail settings in DirectX-based games. The FirePro D300, being a workstation-oriented card from the FirePro line, lacks the gaming-focused features and driver optimizations of the GeForce series.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 has an average benchmark score of 19,637, slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB’s 19,334. Both cards share the same 64th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1060 3 GB scores 27,001 versus the FirePro D300’s 19,515, a 27.7% difference favoring NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro D300 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the FirePro D300 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 19,759, beating the GTX 1060’s 17,475 by 13.1%.

Q: What are the TDP and power requirements for each card?

A: The FirePro D300 has a 150 W TDP and requires a 450 W suggested PSU. The GTX 1060 3 GB has a 120 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1060 3 GB has 3 GB of GDDR5 with 192.2 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5 with 162.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the release dates for these cards?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 was released on January 17, 2014, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB launched on August 17, 2016. Both are now end-of-life products.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro D300 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 2,800 million | 4,400 million |

| Die Size | 212 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 22.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not specified | 1506 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 1708 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) | 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 162.6 GB/s | 192.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 1152 |

| TMUs | 80 | 72 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 27.20 GPixel/s | 81.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 68.00 GTexel/s | 123.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.176 TFLOPS | 3.935 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not specified | 61.49 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 150 W | 120 W |

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

| Power Connectors | Not specified | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Length | 242 mm (9.5 inches) | 250 mm (9.8 inches) |

| Release Date | 2014-01-17 | 2016-08-17 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | 199 USD |