AMD FirePro D700 vs AMD Radeon R9 M295X Comparison

The Verdict

The data paints a surprisingly balanced picture between these two AMD workstation and mobile graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X and the AMD FirePro D700 each secure one benchmark victory in the recorded head-to-head results, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 10.6%, with the R9 M295X averaging 28,580 points compared to the FirePro D700's 25,842 points. This is not a case of one card dominating the other; it is a split decision based on workload and API preference.

The Radeon R9 M295X is the choice for users prioritizing Vulkan performance and modern API compatibility. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 29,091 is 4% higher than the FirePro D700's 27,968. For those whose applications leverage the Vulkan API, the data indicates a measurable, though not overwhelming, advantage for the R9 M295X. Conversely, the FirePro D700 takes the lead in OpenCL workloads, scoring 23,716 versus the R9 M295X's 22,858, a 3.6% advantage. The FirePro D700 also offers double the memory capacity, 6 GB versus 4 GB, and a substantially wider memory bus, 384-bit versus 256-bit, which translates to significantly higher memory bandwidth. The R9 M295X, however, is built on a newer architecture, GCN 3.0, and supports DirectX 12 (12_0) fully, while the FirePro D700 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). The verdict is simple: pick the R9 M295X for Vulkan and modern graphics feature sets, pick the FirePro D700 for OpenCL compute and memory-heavy workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results suggest a clear split in use cases. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X wins in the Vulkan API, which is increasingly common in modern game engines and cross-platform graphics applications. Its 4% lead in Geekbench Vulkan indicates that for real-time rendering tasks using this API, the R9 M295X will deliver smoother performance. The R9 M295X also has the advantage of a newer architecture, GCN 3.0, which brings feature improvements over the older GCN 1.0 design found in the FirePro D700.

The AMD FirePro D700, on the other hand, wins in OpenCL, a framework widely used for general-purpose GPU compute, including tasks like video encoding, scientific simulation, and some rendering workloads. Its 3.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL suggests it holds an edge in raw compute throughput. The data also shows the FirePro D700 has a substantially higher memory bandwidth, 263.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s, which is critical for workloads that are bound by memory access rather than pure shader throughput. Furthermore, the FirePro D700 offers 6 GB of VRAM compared to the R9 M295X's 4 GB, making it better suited for large datasets that exceed 4 GB. The FirePro D700 also has a higher pixel rate (27.20 GPixel/s vs. 23.14 GPixel/s) and texture rate (108.8 GTexel/s vs. 92.54 GTexel/s), which can benefit fill-rate-limited scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The Radeon R9 M295X is based on the Amethyst chip using GCN 3.0, while the FirePro D700 uses the Tahiti chip with GCN 1.0. This is a significant generational leap, as GCN 3.0 introduced architectural refinements over the first-generation GCN design. Both are fabricated on the same 28 nm process at TSMC, but the R9 M295X packs more transistors, 5,000 million, onto a slightly larger die of 366 mm². The FirePro D700 has 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. This results in a higher transistor density for the R9 M295X at 13.7M / mm² compared to 12.3M / mm² for the FirePro D700.

The shading unit count is identical at 2,048, as are the texture mapping units (128) and render output units (32). However, the FirePro D700 operates at higher clocks for its memory (1370 MHz versus 1250 MHz) and presumably for its core, leading to its higher fill rates and FP32 throughput of 3.482 TFLOPS versus the R9 M295X's 2.961 TFLOPS. The R9 M295X supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the FirePro D700's FP16 capability is not recorded in the database. In terms of API support, both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, but the R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) while the FirePro D700 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). The form factor also differs drastically: the R9 M295X is an MXM module, designed for laptops and portable devices, while the FirePro D700 is a dual-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card, 279 mm in length, for desktop workstations.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M295X has a higher average benchmark score of 28,580 compared to the AMD FirePro D700's 25,842.

Q: Does the Radeon R9 M295X win in any API-specific benchmarks?

A: Yes, the R9 M295X wins in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 29,091, which is 4% higher than the FirePro D700's score of 27,968.

Q: In which benchmark does the FirePro D700 outperform the R9 M295X?

A: The FirePro D700 wins in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 23,716 versus the R9 M295X's 22,858, a 3.6% difference.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Radeon R9 M295X has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the FirePro D700 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: Which card provides higher memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro D700 provides significantly higher memory bandwidth at 263.0 GB/s, compared to the R9 M295X's 160.0 GB/s.

Q: What are the architectural generations of these two GPUs?

A: The Radeon R9 M295X is based on GCN 3.0 architecture (chip: Amethyst), while the FirePro D700 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture (chip: Tahiti).

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The FirePro D700 has higher FP32 performance at 3.482 TFLOPS, while the R9 M295X delivers 2.961 TFLOPS.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison in the database yields one win for each GPU. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD FirePro D700 scores 23,716 against the Radeon R9 M295X's 22,858. This 3.6% delta places the FirePro D700 ahead for OpenCL-accelerated tasks. The FirePro D700's higher theoretical FP32 throughput, 3.482 TFLOPS versus 2.961 TFLOPS, and its vast memory bandwidth advantage, 263.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s, likely contribute to this result. For compute workloads that scale with bandwidth and raw shader throughput, the FirePro D700 is the stronger performer according to this data.

The tables turn in Geekbench Vulkan. Here, the Radeon R9 M295X scores 29,091, outperforming the FirePro D700's 27,968. This 4% advantage is notable, and it suggests that the newer GCN 3.0 architecture of the R9 M295X offers better efficiency or feature support for the Vulkan API. The R9 M295X's DX12 (12_0) support compared to the FirePro D700's DX12 (11_1) also hints at a more modern feature set that may align better with Vulkan's requirements. The R9 M295X's performance in this test is also reflected in its overall percentile rank of 74 versus the FirePro D700's 71, indicating it sits higher in the global performance distribution. The average benchmark score also favors the R9 M295X, 28,580 versus 25,842, which is a 10.6% gap, even though the head-to-head wins are split evenly.

Specification Differences

The primary differences between the AMD Radeon R9 M295X and the AMD FirePro D700 are substantial, spanning architecture, memory subsystem, and physical design. The R9 M295X uses the Amethyst chip (GCN 3.0) while the FirePro D700 uses Tahiti (GCN 1.0). The R9 M295X has a transistor count of 5,000 million on a 366 mm² die, whereas the FirePro D700 has 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. The memory configuration differs significantly: the R9 M295X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro D700 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 263.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock also differs, with the FirePro D700 running at 1370 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) versus the R9 M295X's 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

The compute and fill rates differ as well. The FirePro D700 has a higher pixel rate (27.20 GPixel/s vs. 23.14 GPixel/s), texture rate (108.8 GTexel/s vs. 92.54 GTexel/s), and FP32 performance (3.482 TFLOPS vs. 2.961 TFLOPS). The R9 M295X supports FP16 at 1:1 ratio, while the FirePro D700 has no recorded FP16 capability. The power draw is slightly different, with the R9 M295X rated at 250 W and the FirePro D700 at 274 W. The physical form factor is a major differentiator: the R9 M295X is an MXM Module (MXM-B 3.0 interface) with no power connectors, while the FirePro D700 is a Dual-slot card measuring 279 mm with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and a suggested 600 W power supply. The FirePro D700 has 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI outputs, while the R9 M295X's display outputs are portable-device dependent. Finally, the API support differs: the R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) while the FirePro D700 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both share the same OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170 support. The release dates also differ, with the FirePro D700 launching earlier in 2014 compared to the R9 M295X later that year.