AMD FirePro D300 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Comparison

The AMD FirePro D300 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 are both end-of-life, 28 nm parts from the 2013-2014 era, but they target completely different workloads. The FirePro D300 is a professional data-center card built on GCN 1.0, while the GTX 780 is a consumer desktop GPU based on Kepler. Benchmark data from Geekbench shows the GTX 780 leading in both compute tests, but the D300 holds its own in specific professional contexts. The GTX 780 delivers roughly 14.6% higher OpenCL scores and 19.4% higher Vulkan scores, yet the D300 matches it in overall GPU percentile ranking. The choice between them depends entirely on whether you need raw compute throughput or professional display and driver features.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro D300 has a higher average benchmark score of 19,637 compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780’s 19,164. However, this average is based on only two tests for the D300 (OpenCL and Vulkan) versus three for the GTX 780 (Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan). The GTX 780’s lower average is dragged down by its Metal score of 10,114, which the D300 does not have a corresponding result for.

Q: How do the two cards compare in raw compute performance?

A: The GTX 780 wins decisively in both shared benchmarks. It scores 22,863 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 19,515 for the D300, a 14.6% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 780 scores 24,514 versus 19,759, a 19.4% lead. The D300 has no test where it beats the GTX 780.

Q: Are these cards from the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node. However, the die sizes differ dramatically. The GTX 780’s GK110 chip is 561 mm² with 7,080 million transistors, while the D300’s Pitcairn chip is just 212 mm² with 2,800 million transistors. This makes the D300’s transistor density higher at 13.2M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm² for the GTX 780.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 162.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 780 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, providing 288.4 GB/s. The GTX 780’s memory runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the D300’s memory runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective).

Q: Which card has a higher pixel and texture fill rate?

A: The GTX 780 dominates in both. It delivers 43.30 GPixel/s pixel rate and 173.2 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to the D300’s 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s. The GTX 780’s advantage in texture rate is particularly large, at roughly 2.5 times the D300’s.

Q: What is the GTX 780’s launch MSRP?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 had a launch MSRP of 649 USD. The FirePro D300 has no listed launch MSRP in the data.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 is the superior performer in every benchmark where both cards are tested. It wins the OpenCL test by 14.6% and the Vulkan test by 19.4%, and it has significantly higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput. If you need raw compute power for general-purpose workloads, the GTX 780 is the clear choice.

However, the AMD FirePro D300 is not without merit. It achieves the same 64th percentile ranking among all GPUs as the GTX 780, despite its lower raw scores. This suggests that in the specific professional workloads where FirePro drivers and optimizations matter, the D300 performs competitively. Its single-slot design (versus dual-slot for the GTX 780) and lower TDP of 150 W (versus 250 W) make it easier to integrate into dense systems. The D300 also supports newer DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the GTX 780’s DirectX 12 (11_0).

For a system builder focused purely on compute benchmarks, pick the GTX 780. For a professional workstation requiring a single-slot card with lower power draw and professional display outputs (4x DisplayPort 1.2), the D300 is the practical choice. The GTX 780’s 649 USD launch MSRP reflects its consumer-positioned performance tier, but the D300’s lack of a listed MSRP suggests it was sold through OEM channels rather than retail.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a clear win for the GTX 780: 22,863 versus 19,515, a delta of -14.6% from the D300’s perspective. This means the D300 scores about 14.6% lower than the GTX 780. In practical terms, this gap is significant for any OpenCL-accelerated application, whether it is video encoding, physics simulation, or data processing. The GTX 780’s advantage stems from its higher shading unit count (2304 versus 1280), more TMUs (192 versus 80), and higher FP32 throughput (4.156 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS).

The Vulkan test shows an even larger gap. The GTX 780 scores 24,514 versus the D300’s 19,759, a delta of -19.4%. Vulkan is a low-level API that benefits from raw hardware throughput, and the GTX 780’s superior texture and pixel rates (173.2 GTexel/s and 43.30 GPixel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s and 27.20 GPixel/s) translate directly into higher frame rates and compute performance. The GTX 780 also has a higher memory bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s versus 162.6 GB/s, which helps in memory-bound Vulkan workloads.

The D300 has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head comparison. The winsA field is 0, and winsB is 2. However, the D300’s average benchmark score of 19,637 is higher than the GTX 780’s 19,164, solely because the GTX 780’s Metal score of 10,114 pulls its average down. This Metal score is not comparable, as the D300 has no Metal benchmark, but it highlights that the GTX 780 is not universally faster across all APIs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every spec that matters for performance. The GTX 780 has 2304 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the D300 has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 780’s FP32 throughput is 4.156 TFLOPS, nearly double the D300’s 2.176 TFLOPS. Pixel rate is 43.30 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 173.2 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s.

Memory differs substantially: the GTX 780 has 3 GB on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the D300 has 2 GB on a 256-bit bus with 162.6 GB/s. Clock speeds also differ: the GTX 780 has a base clock of 863 MHz and boost of 902 MHz, while the D300 has no listed base or boost clock. The GTX 780’s memory runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), versus the D300’s 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps).

Power and physical design diverge. The GTX 780 has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested PSU, with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors. The D300 has a 150 W TDP and a 450 W suggested PSU. The GTX 780 is dual-slot, measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width. The D300 is single-slot, measuring 242 mm in length with no listed height or width. Display outputs differ: the D300 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2, while the GTX 780 has 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

Architecture Differences

The D300 uses the Pitcairn chip built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, while the GTX 780 uses the GK110 chip built on NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm node, but the die sizes are vastly different: 212 mm² for Pitcairn versus 561 mm² for GK110. Transistor counts are 2,800 million versus 7,080 million, with the D300 having a higher transistor density of 13.2M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm².

The D300 is part of AMD’s FirePro Data Center generation (Dx00), succeeding FirePro Terascale and preceding Radeon Instinct. The GTX 780 is part of NVIDIA’s GeForce 700 generation, succeeding GeForce 600 and preceding GeForce 900. The D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GTX 780 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 780 has a newer Vulkan version at 1.2.175 versus the D300’s 1.2.170.

The GTX 780 has a much larger memory bus (384-bit versus 256-bit) and more memory (3 GB versus 2 GB), which reflects its consumer gaming focus where high bandwidth is critical. The D300’s 4x DisplayPort outputs and single-slot design indicate a professional multi-display or compute-rack orientation. The GTX 780’s dual-slot design and power connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin) are typical for high-end consumer GPUs of its era.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 780 wins in every measurable compute benchmark: OpenCL by 14.6% and Vulkan by 19.4%. It also wins decisively in raw throughput metrics: FP32 (4.156 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS), pixel rate (43.30 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s), and texture rate (173.2 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s). If your workload is any form of general-purpose GPU computing, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the GTX 780 is the better card.

The D300 wins in practical deployment scenarios. Its single-slot design allows it to fit in denser chassis than the GTX 780’s dual-slot format. Its 150 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU make it far easier to power in a multi-GPU or constrained system. The D300’s 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs are superior for professional multi-monitor setups compared to the GTX 780’s mixed DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort array. The D300 also has a higher average benchmark score (19,637 versus 19,164) when considering all available tests, though this is skewed by the GTX 780’s low Metal score.

For professional applications that are optimized for AMD’s FirePro drivers (common in CAD, medical imaging, and financial analytics), the D300’s GCN 1.0 architecture may deliver more consistent performance than raw benchmark numbers suggest. Its higher transistor density (13.2M per mm²) indicates a more efficient design per square millimeter, which can translate to better thermal behavior in sustained workloads. The GTX 780’s successor is GeForce 900, while the D300’s successor is Radeon Instinct, signaling that AMD positioned the D300 for data-center longevity rather than consumer gaming.