AMD FirePro D700 vs AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two direct head-to-head comparisons between the AMD FirePro D700 and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700, and in both cases the newer card dominates decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon AI PRO R9700 scores 118,202 against the FirePro D700’s 23,716, a delta of -79.9% from the perspective of the older card. That means the R9700 delivers roughly five times the raw compute throughput in this particular API test, a gap so wide that it essentially places the two products in different performance strata.

The Vulkan result tells a similar story, though with a slightly narrower margin. The R9700 posts 63,550 points, while the FirePro D700 manages 27,968. The delta here is -56%, meaning the newer card is more than double the older one’s score. Interestingly, the FirePro D700’s Vulkan score is proportionally much closer to its OpenCL result than is the case for the R9700, which may hint at architectural differences in how each GPU handles these two APIs. The R9700’s OpenCL advantage over its own Vulkan score (118,202 versus 63,550) is striking, suggesting that its compute-oriented design excels in OpenCL workloads.

When looking at the broader database context, the FirePro D700’s average benchmark score is 25,842, placing it in the 71st percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W7100 (25,856, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25,891, delta -0.2%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740, delta 0.4%), and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 (25,726, delta 0.5%). These are essentially statistical ties, meaning the D700 sits in a tightly packed cluster of mid-range performers from its era. The R9700, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 23,315, which lands it in the 69th percentile, slightly lower than the D700’s percentile despite its vastly superior head-to-head results. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23,276, delta 0.2%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273, delta 0.2%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, delta 0.3%), and the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, delta 0.3%). This seeming paradox, where the R9700 crushes the D700 in direct comparisons yet has a lower average score, likely reflects the fact that the two cards are benchmarked across very different test suites, with the R9700’s results including a wider range of workloads.

The R9700 also has a much larger benchmark profile in the database, with ten recorded tests spanning 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, multiple Passmark DirectX variants, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. The FirePro D700 only has two recorded tests, both Geekbench. The R9700’s Passmark G3D score of 26,979 and GPU compute score of 15,300 provide additional context that the D700 lacks, making a full cross-card comparison difficult beyond the shared Geekbench tests.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and profound. The FirePro D700 uses the Tahiti chip, built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,313 million transistors into a 352 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The Radeon AI PRO R9700, by contrast, uses the Navi 48 chip with RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². That is a 12-fold increase in density, made possible by the dramatic shrink in process technology.

The memory subsystems are equally divergent. The D700 features 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, running at 1370 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective), delivering 263.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9700 offers 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), for 644.6 GB/s. Despite having a narrower bus, the R9700 achieves more than double the bandwidth due to the much faster memory clocks. The capacity difference is also significant: 32 GB versus 6 GB is a 5.3x increase, which matters enormously for large datasets in AI or compute workloads.

Compute resources tell a similar story. The D700 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, producing 27.20 GPixel/s and 108.8 GTexel/s, with 3.482 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The R9700 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, yielding 373.8 GPixel/s and 747.5 GTexel/s, with 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32. That is nearly 14x the FP32 throughput, and the R9700 also offers FP16 at 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), a feature the D700 lacks entirely. The R9700 additionally includes 64 ray tracing cores, while the D700 has none.

Clock speeds differ as well. The D700’s base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database, but its memory clock is 1370 MHz. The R9700 explicitly lists a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2350 MHz, and a boost clock of 2920 MHz. The R9700 also features PCIe 5.0 x16 connectivity versus the D700’s PCIe 3.0 x16, a doubling of the interface generation. API support has advanced too: the D700 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the R9700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows no benchmark wins for the FirePro D700. In the only two direct comparisons available, the Radeon AI PRO R9700 wins both. This is a clean sweep, and the margins are so large that it is difficult to construct a scenario where the D700 is competitive in any measurable workload represented by the recorded tests. However, the D700 does hold a few qualitative advantages that are worth noting. Its 384-bit memory bus, while slower in raw bandwidth, may offer different memory access patterns that could be relevant in specific legacy workloads, though the database does not provide evidence for this. Its 6 GB of GDDR5 is far smaller than the R9700’s 32 GB, but for older applications designed around smaller memory footprints, that capacity may be sufficient.

The R9700 wins decisively in compute (OpenCL), graphics API performance (Vulkan), and all the Passmark tests available in its benchmark profile, including DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7,006 further underscores its modern rendering capabilities. The R9700 also has a massive advantage in pixel fill rate (373.8 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s) and texture rate (747.5 GTexel/s versus 108.8 GTexel/s), which directly impacts rasterization-heavy workloads. For ray tracing, the R9700’s 64 dedicated cores are present while the D700 has none, making the newer card the only viable choice for any ray-traced content.

The D700 does have a lower power draw (274 W versus 300 W) and a lower suggested PSU (600 W versus 700 W), which could be relevant in constrained power environments. But the performance per watt is not recorded in the database, so any efficiency comparison must remain qualitative. The D700 is also end-of-life, while the R9700 is active, which has implications for driver support and longevity, though the database does not quantify this.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is the superior product by every measured metric. Its OpenCL score of 118,202 is 79.9% ahead of the FirePro D700, and its Vulkan score of 63,550 is 56% ahead. The R9700 offers 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus 3.482 TFLOPS, 32 GB of memory versus 6 GB, and 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth versus 263.0 GB/s. It has 4x the shading units, 2x the TMUs, 4x the ROPs, and adds ray tracing cores that the D700 lacks entirely. The R9700 is built on a 4 nm process versus 28 nm, with 12x the transistor density, and supports modern APIs like DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

The only areas where the D700 can claim any edge are power consumption (274 W versus 300 W) and its 384-bit memory bus, which is wider but slower. Neither of these advantages translates into a benchmark win in the recorded data. The D700’s percentile ranking (71st) is slightly higher than the R9700’s (69th), but this is likely an artifact of the different benchmark suites each card is tested with, not an indication of real-world superiority.

For any workload represented in the database, from OpenCL compute to Vulkan graphics to DirectX gaming, the R9700 is the clear choice. The D700 should be considered only for legacy applications where its specific feature set (such as the SDI output) is required, and even then, the performance gap is so large that the R9700 would likely handle those tasks better if the software supports it. The verdict is simple: the R9700 wins on architecture, memory, compute, and every benchmark recorded.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Radeon AI PRO R9700 in OpenCL compared to the FirePro D700?

A: The R9700 scores 118,202 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the D700 scores 23,716, making the R9700 79.9% faster in this specific test.

Q: Does the FirePro D700 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the R9700 wins both, with the D700 trailing by 79.9% and 56% respectively.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The D700 has 6 GB of GDDR5, while the R9700 has 32 GB of GDDR6, a 5.3x capacity increase that is significant for large datasets.

Q: Does the R9700 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the R9700 includes 64 ray tracing cores. The D700 has no ray tracing cores, so it cannot perform hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: How do their process nodes compare?

A: The D700 is built on a 28 nm process with 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. The R9700 is built on a 4 nm process with 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, resulting in a 151.0M per mm² density versus 12.3M per mm².

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The D700 delivers 3.482 TFLOPS of FP32, while the R9700 delivers 47.84 TFLOPS, a 13.7x advantage for the newer card. The R9700 also offers FP16 at 47.84 TFLOPS, which the D700 does not provide.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro D700 | AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 |

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

| Chip | Tahiti | Navi 48 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | RDNA 4.0 |

| Generation | FirePro Data Center (Dx00) | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 4,313 million | 53,900 million |

| Die Size | 352 mm² | 357 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 151.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not recorded | 1660 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not recorded | 2350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not recorded | 2920 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1370 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) | 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 263.0 GB/s | 644.6 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 128 | 256 |

| ROPs | 32 | 128 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 27.20 GPixel/s | 373.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 108.8 GTexel/s | 747.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.482 TFLOPS | 47.84 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not recorded | 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 274 W | 300 W |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x SDI | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Length | 279 mm (11 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Width | Not recorded | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Height | Not recorded | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | 1x 16-pin |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2014-01-17 | 2025-07-22 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | Radeon Pro Vega |

| Successor | Radeon Instinct | None recorded |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 1,299 USD |