AMD FirePro D500 vs AMD Radeon R9 370X Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro D500 records an average benchmark score of 18,533, while the AMD Radeon R9 370X averages 15,862. This places the FirePro D500 at the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the R9 370X at the 58th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Vulkan benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the FirePro D500 scores 18,533 versus 9,018 for the R9 370X. That is a 105.5% advantage for the FirePro D500, making it the clear winner in the only head-to-head test recorded.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The FirePro D500 packs 1,536 shading units and 96 TMUs. The R9 370X has 1,280 shading units and 80 TMUs. Both cards share 32 ROPs.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The FirePro D500 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 243.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 370X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 179.2 GB/s.

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

A: The R9 370X leads in raw fill rates with 32.96 GPixel/s and 82.40 GTexel/s. The FirePro D500 trails at 23.20 GPixel/s and 69.60 GTexel/s.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the R9 370X?

A: The Radeon R9 370X had a launch MSRP of 199 USD. The FirePro D500 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Architecture Differences

Both the AMD FirePro D500 and the AMD Radeon R9 370X are built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The underlying chips differ considerably. The FirePro D500 uses the Tahiti die, which contains 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The R9 370X uses the Trinidad chip, with 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, giving a slightly higher density of 13.2M per mm².

The FirePro D500 belongs to the FirePro Data Center (Dx00) generation, while the R9 370X is part of the Pirate Islands (R9 300) generation. The FirePro D500 was released in January 2014, and the R9 370X followed in August 2015. The FirePro D500's predecessor is FirePro Terascale, and its successor is Radeon Instinct. The R9 370X's predecessor is Volcanic Islands, and its successor is Arctic Islands.

In terms of compute resources, the FirePro D500 has more shading units (1,536 vs 1,280) and more TMUs (96 vs 80), but the R9 370X clocks higher. The R9 370X has a base clock of 980 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz, whereas the FirePro D500 has no recorded base or boost clock. The R9 370X's memory runs at 1400 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective), while the FirePro D500's memory runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective).

Both cards support PCIe 3.0 x16, DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores. The FirePro D500 offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs plus one SDI output, while the R9 370X provides two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2. The FirePro D500 is a longer card at 279 mm (11 inches), while the R9 370X measures 221 mm (8.7 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench Vulkan. The results are decisive. The FirePro D500 scores 18,533, while the R9 370X scores 9,018. This gives the FirePro D500 a 105.5% lead. To put that in perspective, the R9 370X would need nearly double its score to match the FirePro D500 in this test.

The FirePro D500's Vulkan score places it among rivals such as the AMD Radeon RX 560X (18,626, only 0.5% faster), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18,685, 0.8% faster), the Intel Arc A770M (18,383, 0.8% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX 460 (18,373, 0.9% slower). The R9 370X, by contrast, sits in a completely different performance tier. Its average score of 15,862 is close to the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (15,852, 0.1% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16,014, 1% faster), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679, 1.2% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16,129, 1.7% faster).

The FirePro D500's 105.5% Vulkan margin over the R9 370X is the single largest gap recorded in the head-to-head data. No benchmark shows the R9 370X winning. The wins tally confirms this: the FirePro D500 has 1 win, the R9 370X has 0.

However, the R9 370X does not lose every metric. Its fill rates are higher, its clock speeds are higher, and its FP32 compute is higher at 2.637 TFLOPS versus 2.227 TFLOPS for the FirePro D500. Yet these theoretical advantages do not translate into Vulkan performance, where the FirePro D500 dominates. The FirePro D500 also holds the memory bandwidth advantage at 243.8 GB/s versus 179.2 GB/s, which likely contributes to its Vulkan lead.

Specification Differences

• Chip: FirePro D500 uses Tahiti; R9 370X uses Trinidad.
• Transistors: 4,313 million (FirePro D500) vs 2,800 million (R9 370X).
• Die Size: 352 mm² (FirePro D500) vs 212 mm² (R9 370X).
• Transistor Density: 12.3M / mm² (FirePro D500) vs 13.2M / mm² (R9 370X).
• Base Clock: Not recorded for FirePro D500; 980 MHz for R9 370X.
• Boost Clock: Not recorded for FirePro D500; 1030 MHz for R9 370X.
• Memory Clock: 1270 MHz / 5.1 Gbps (FirePro D500) vs 1400 MHz / 5.6 Gbps (R9 370X).
• Memory Size: 3 GB (FirePro D500) vs 2 GB (R9 370X).
• Memory Bus Width: 384 bit (FirePro D500) vs 256 bit (R9 370X).
• Memory Bandwidth: 243.8 GB/s (FirePro D500) vs 179.2 GB/s (R9 370X).
• Shading Units: 1536 (FirePro D500) vs 1280 (R9 370X).
• TMUs: 96 (FirePro D500) vs 80 (R9 370X).
• ROPs: 32 for both.
• Pixel Rate: 23.20 GPixel/s (FirePro D500) vs 32.96 GPixel/s (R9 370X).
• Texture Rate: 69.60 GTexel/s (FirePro D500) vs 82.40 GTexel/s (R9 370X).
• FP32: 2.227 TFLOPS (FirePro D500) vs 2.637 TFLOPS (R9 370X).
• TDP: 274 W (FirePro D500) vs 180 W (R9 370X).
• Power Connectors: Not recorded for FirePro D500; 2x 6-pin for R9 370X.
• Suggested PSU: 600 W (FirePro D500) vs 450 W (R9 370X).
• Slot Width: Dual-slot for both.
• Display Outputs: 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 + 1x SDI (FirePro D500) vs 2x DVI + 1x HDMI 1.4a + 1x DisplayPort 1.2 (R9 370X).
• Length: 279 mm / 11 inches (FirePro D500) vs 221 mm / 8.7 inches (R9 370X).
• Height: Not recorded for FirePro D500; 111 mm / 4.4 inches for R9 370X.
• Release Date: January 2014 (FirePro D500) vs August 2015 (R9 370X).
• Generation: FirePro Data Center (Dx00) vs Pirate Islands (R9 300).
• Average Benchmark Score: 18,533 (FirePro D500) vs 15,862 (R9 370X).
• Percentile: 62nd (FirePro D500) vs 58th (R9 370X).
• Launch MSRP: Not recorded for FirePro D500; 199 USD for R9 370X.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in roles. The FirePro D500 is the stronger GPU in the recorded Vulkan benchmark by a massive 105.5% margin, and it holds a higher average benchmark score (18,533 vs 15,862) and a higher percentile ranking (62nd vs 58th). If the task involves Vulkan workloads, the FirePro D500 is the obvious choice.

The R9 370X, however, is not without its own advantages. It has a lower TDP (180 W vs 274 W), a lower suggested PSU (450 W vs 600 W), a higher FP32 compute rate (2.637 TFLOPS vs 2.227 TFLOPS), and higher pixel and texture fill rates. It is also a shorter card (221 mm vs 279 mm), which may fit in smaller cases. The R9 370X is the more efficient card per watt in terms of raw compute, but that efficiency does not show up in the Vulkan score.

The FirePro D500's memory subsystem is substantially larger: 3 GB on a 384-bit bus with 243.8 GB/s bandwidth versus 2 GB on a 256-bit bus with 179.2 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bound, this difference is likely decisive. The R9 370X's higher clocks and fill rates suggest it is tuned for rasterization throughput, but the benchmark data does not include any rasterization tests to confirm this.

The nearest rival data reinforces the tier gap. The FirePro D500 competes with cards like the RX 560X and Pro 5700 XT, all within 1% of each other. The R9 370X competes with the RX 7700, RX 9060, Pro W5500, and RTX 3060 Ti, all within 2% of its average score. These are two different performance classes.

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro D500 wins in: Vulkan performance, with a 105.5% lead over the R9 370X. It also wins on memory capacity (3 GB vs 2 GB), memory bandwidth (243.8 GB/s vs 179.2 GB/s), memory bus width (384 bit vs 256 bit), shading units (1,536 vs 1,280), TMUs (96 vs 80), transistor count (4,313 million vs 2,800 million), die size (352 mm² vs 212 mm²), and average benchmark score (18,533 vs 15,862). Its nearest rivals are all within 1% of its score, placing it in a stable mid-tier position.

AMD Radeon R9 370X wins in: FP32 compute throughput (2.637 TFLOPS vs 2.227 TFLOPS), pixel rate (32.96 GPixel/s vs 23.20 GPixel/s), texture rate (82.40 GTexel/s vs 69.60 GTexel/s), base and boost clocks (980 MHz and 1030 MHz, both not recorded for the FirePro D500), memory clock (1400 MHz vs 1270 MHz), power efficiency (180 W TDP vs 274 W TDP), and physical footprint (221 mm vs 279 mm length). It also has a lower suggested PSU requirement (450 W vs 600 W) and a recorded launch MSRP of 199 USD.

Use-case summary: For compute-heavy or Vulkan-based workloads, the FirePro D500 is the stronger performer in the database. For systems where power draw, physical size, and fill rate matter more, the R9 370X has the edge. The R9 370X operates in a lower performance tier, as shown by its 58th percentile versus the FirePro D500's 62nd percentile, but it does so with less power and a more compact design. The decision rests on whether the workload favors the FirePro D500's memory bandwidth and Vulkan score or the R9 370X's higher clocks and lower power envelope.