AMD FirePro D700 vs AMD Radeon RX 6700M Comparison

The AMD FirePro D700 and AMD Radeon RX 6700M represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by seven years of architectural evolution. While both cards land at the 71st percentile in the benchmark database, their underlying technologies and performance profiles could not be more different. The data reveals a generational clash where the newer mobile part utterly dominates in raw compute, yet the older workstation card holds its own in specific legacy scenarios.

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro D700 has an average benchmark score of 25,842, while the AMD Radeon RX 6700M scores 25,633. The FirePro D700 is ahead by approximately 0.8%, based on the deltaPct value of -0.8% for the RX 6700M relative to the FirePro D700.

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700M is dramatically faster in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 77,666 versus the FirePro D700's 23,716. This represents a 69.5% advantage for the RX 6700M, meaning it delivers over three times the OpenCL performance.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The RX 6700M's Navi 22 chip has a transistor density of 51.3M per mm², which is more than four times denser than the FirePro D700's Tahiti chip at 12.3M per mm². This density advantage comes from the newer 7nm process node versus the 28nm node used by the older card.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth, and how does that impact performance?

A: The RX 6700M has 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth, exceeding the FirePro D700's 263.0 GB/s. This 57 GB/s advantage helps the newer card feed its faster shader array, but the FirePro D700's wider 384-bit bus versus the RX 6700M's 160-bit bus shows a different design philosophy.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No, they differ significantly. The FirePro D700 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the RX 6700M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). This means the newer card has access to modern rendering features that the older architecture cannot utilize.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The FirePro D700 has a TDP of 274 W, while the RX 6700M draws just 135 W. The RX 6700M delivers vastly higher performance while consuming roughly half the power, illustrating the efficiency gains of the newer process node and architecture.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The FirePro D700 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using the Tahiti chip, fabricated on TSMC's 28nm process. This is a first-generation Graphics Core Next design that debuted in the professional workstation segment. In contrast, the RX 6700M uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 7nm node. The process shrink alone allows for 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, compared to 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die for the Tahiti chip. The transistor density jumps from 12.3M per mm² to 51.3M per mm², a 4.2x improvement.

The RX 6700M brings modern features that the FirePro D700 simply cannot match. It includes 36 ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing, while the older card has none. The RX 6700M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which provides features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading. The FirePro D700 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), an earlier iteration of the API. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 6700M has Vulkan 1.4 support versus 1.2.170 on the older card.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The FirePro D700 uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, while the RX 6700M uses 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus. The newer GDDR6 memory runs at 16 Gbps effective versus 5.5 Gbps effective on the older GDDR5. Despite the narrower bus, the RX 6700M achieves 320.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 263.0 GB/s. The RX 6700M also features a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, twice the bandwidth of the FirePro D700's PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a clear picture for most workloads: the AMD Radeon RX 6700M is the superior GPU. In both shared benchmark tests, it wins decisively. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 77,666 versus 23,716 represents a 69.5% advantage, and the Vulkan score of 90,816 versus 27,968 shows a 69.2% lead. The RX 6700M also offers more than double the FP32 compute at 11.06 TFLOPS versus 3.482 TFLOPS, and it does so at nearly half the power draw.

However, the FirePro D700 is not without merit. It was designed as a professional workstation card with 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI outputs, making it suitable for multi-display professional environments. Its 384-bit memory bus provides high bandwidth per clock, and its end-of-life status means it can be found in legacy systems. The data shows the FirePro D700 has a slight average benchmark edge of 0.8% over the RX 6700M, but this comes from only two tests versus the newer card's eleven benchmark entries.

For modern gaming, compute workloads, or any application that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the RX 6700M is the clear choice. For legacy workstation deployments that rely on the FirePro D700's specific display outputs and professional driver ecosystem, the older card remains functional. The data strongly favors the RX 6700M for virtually every performance metric.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node moves from 28nm to 7nm, enabling the RX 6700M to pack 17,200 million transistors versus 4,313 million. The memory subsystem changes from 6 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus to 10 GB GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, with effective speeds rising from 5.5 Gbps to 16 Gbps. Bandwidth increases from 263.0 GB/s to 320.0 GB/s.

The shader configuration shifts from 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs to 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 6700M adds 36 ray tracing cores. Pixel rate jumps from 27.20 GPixel/s to 153.6 GPixel/s, and texture rate rises from 108.8 GTexel/s to 345.6 GTexel/s. FP32 compute more than triples from 3.482 TFLOPS to 11.06 TFLOPS, with the RX 6700M also offering 22.12 TFLOPS FP16.

Power characteristics differ substantially: the FirePro D700 has a 274 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU, while the RX 6700M has a 135 W TDP with no PSU requirement as an integrated GPU. The FirePro D700 is dual-slot with 279 mm length, while the RX 6700M is IGP form factor. The RX 6700M uses PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on the older card. Display outputs change from 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI to portable device dependent outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs share exactly two benchmark tests in the database, and the RX 6700M wins both convincingly. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700M scores 77,666 against the FirePro D700's 23,716. The deltaPct of -69.5% for the FirePro D700 means the older card is 69.5% slower. This is a massive margin that reflects the architectural leap from GCN 1.0 to RDNA 2.0, plus the substantial clock speed advantages of the newer chip.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a similar story. The RX 6700M achieves 90,816, while the FirePro D700 manages 27,968, a 69.2% difference. Vulkan is a modern low-level API, and the RX 6700M's superior shader throughput and ray tracing capabilities give it a commanding lead. The FirePro D700's Vulkan support stops at version 1.2.170, while the RX 6700M supports Vulkan 1.4, which may impact driver optimization and feature access.

The RX 6700M also has a broader benchmark portfolio, with entries in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (1,845), Geekbench Metal (91,911), and multiple PassMark tests. Its PassMark G3D score of 13,536 and GPU compute score of 5,191 provide additional performance context. The FirePro D700 has no corresponding scores in these tests, limiting direct comparison beyond the two shared benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6700M wins in every head-to-head benchmark category present in the data. Its 69.5% OpenCL advantage and 69.2% Vulkan advantage are overwhelming. The RX 6700M also offers modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, making it suitable for contemporary gaming and compute workloads. Its 10 GB memory capacity and higher bandwidth support larger textures and datasets. The 135 W TDP makes it viable for thin-and-light gaming laptops, while the FirePro D700's 274 W TDP requires a desktop workstation with substantial cooling.

The AMD FirePro D700 retains specific advantages in professional workstation contexts. Its 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI outputs make it directly compatible with multi-monitor broadcast environments without adapters. The 384-bit memory bus provides high bandwidth per memory clock, which can benefit certain memory-latency-sensitive workloads. The FirePro D700's slightly higher average benchmark score of 25,842 versus 25,633 suggests that in the narrow set of tests both cards share, the older card has marginal parity on average, though this is heavily skewed by the RX 6700M's inclusion of many additional tests.

For legacy application compatibility, the FirePro D700's GCN 1.0 architecture may have matured drivers for older professional software. The RX 6700M's RDNA 2.0 architecture with 36 ray tracing cores and 22.12 TFLOPS FP16 performance opens possibilities for AI and ray-traced workloads that the FirePro D700 cannot handle. The data shows a clear generational shift: the RX 6700M is the performance winner, while the FirePro D700 remains relevant only in its specific professional niche.