AMD FirePro D700 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two AMD workstation and consumer graphics cards. The AMD Radeon RX 6800 wins both head-to-head tests, but the nature of those wins tells very different stories about each card's strengths.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6800 scores 24,508 against the FirePro D700's 23,716. That is a 3.3% advantage, a modest margin that places both cards in the same general compute performance tier. The FirePro D700, despite its 2014 origins, remains surprisingly competitive in raw OpenCL throughput. This is likely due to its 2048 shading units and 384-bit memory bus, which keep its compute pipelines fed even with older GCN architecture.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is where the generation gap becomes obvious. The RX 6800 scores 115,107, while the FirePro D700 manages only 27,968. That is a 311.6% difference, meaning the RX 6800 delivers over four times the Vulkan performance. This is not an incremental improvement; it is a complete architectural overhaul. The FirePro D700 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, but its GCN 1.0 design was never optimized for modern graphics APIs. The RX 6800's RDNA 2.0 architecture with dedicated ray tracing cores and a much newer command processor handles Vulkan workloads far more efficiently.

The RX 6800 also dominates in every other benchmark category available in the database. In PassMark G3D, it scores 22,067, which is a strong overall graphics score. The FirePro D700 has no recorded PassMark scores, so direct comparison is impossible there. However, the RX 6800's average benchmark score of 30,095 across all tests places it in the 75th percentile of all GPUs. The FirePro D700's average of 25,842 puts it in the 71st percentile. Both are above average, but the RX 6800 sits notably higher.

For legacy DirectX performance, the RX 6800 shows its adaptability. It scores 257 in PassMark DirectX 9, 214 in DirectX 11, and 89 in DirectX 12 (the lower DX12 score is likely a driver or test quirk, not a hardware limitation). The FirePro D700 has no recorded scores in these legacy tests, so the RX 6800 wins by default. The FirePro D700 does support DirectX 12 (11_1), but its feature level is older and its hardware was not designed for modern DX12 workloads.

The RX 6800 wins in every measurable category. The FirePro D700's only competitive showing comes in OpenCL, where it trails by just 3.3%. For Vulkan and modern graphics APIs, the RX 6800 is in a completely different class.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6800 is the superior card for virtually every modern workload. Its 16.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance dwarfs the FirePro D700's 3.482 TFLOPS, a 4.6x difference that shows up in compute-heavy tasks. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, nearly double the FirePro D700's 263.0 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The RX 6800 also has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, versus 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the FirePro D700.

The RX 6800's 60 ray tracing cores are a feature the FirePro D700 lacks entirely. This makes the RX 6800 suitable for modern gaming and real-time rendering workloads that the FirePro D700 cannot handle. The RX 6800's RDNA 2.0 architecture also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro D700 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). This means the RX 6800 can run the latest DX12 Ultimate games and applications, while the FirePro D700 is stuck with older feature levels.

The FirePro D700's niche is narrow but real. In OpenCL compute, it trails by only 3.3%, making it a viable option for legacy compute workloads that do not require modern graphics APIs. Its 6 GB of memory, while smaller, is still sufficient for many professional applications from its era. Its 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and SDI outputs are unusual for a consumer card and could be valuable in specific multi-display or broadcast setups. However, those outputs are obsolete compared to the RX 6800's HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 1.4a, and USB Type-C options.

Who should pick which? The RX 6800 is the clear choice for anyone running modern games, Vulkan-based applications, DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, or general-purpose GPU compute. The FirePro D700 is only worth considering for specialized legacy workflows that require its specific display outputs or where OpenCL performance is the sole criterion and the 3.3% deficit is acceptable. Given that the RX 6800 also has a 4.6x advantage in FP32 throughput and a much higher average benchmark score, the FirePro D700's only real edge is its professional display output configuration, which is a niche requirement.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these cards. The first, Geekbench OpenCL, shows the RX 6800 scoring 24,508 against the FirePro D700's 23,716, a 3.3% win for the newer card. This result is notable because it demonstrates how close the two architectures are in raw compute throughput despite the 6-year gap in release dates. The FirePro D700's GCN 1.0 architecture was designed for compute-heavy professional workloads, and that design philosophy still holds up in OpenCL.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, is a complete blowout. The RX 6800 scores 115,107, while the FirePro D700 scores 27,968. The 311.6% delta means the RX 6800 is roughly 4.1 times faster in Vulkan. This is the largest performance gap in the entire dataset and reflects the fundamental architectural differences between the two cards. Vulkan is a low-level API that exposes modern GPU features directly to developers. The RX 6800's RDNA 2.0 architecture with its 60 ray tracing cores and modern shader pipeline can exploit Vulkan's capabilities far more effectively than the FirePro D700's GCN 1.0 design.

The RX 6800's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti (average score 29,945, 0.5% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (29,928, 0.6% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (29,783, 1% lower). The AMD Radeon RX 6700 scores 30,433, which is 1.1% higher than the RX 6800's average. This places the RX 6800 in a tight performance cluster where 1% swings separate cards.

The FirePro D700's nearest rivals are clustered similarly. The AMD FirePro W7100 scores 25,856, 0.1% higher. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 25,891, 0.2% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 25,740, 0.4% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 scores 25,726, 0.5% lower. The FirePro D700's average of 25,842 places it in a narrow band where no rival is more than 0.5% away in either direction.

The RX 6800's average score of 30,095 is 4,253 points higher than the FirePro D700's 25,842, a 16.5% advantage. That gap is consistent across most workloads but becomes extreme in Vulkan-specific tests. The OpenCL results show that the FirePro D700 can still compete in compute-heavy scenarios, but the Vulkan results demonstrate that the RX 6800 is fundamentally a more capable modern GPU.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Radeon RX 6800 faster than the AMD FirePro D700 in every benchmark?

A: Yes. The RX 6800 wins both head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 24,508 versus 23,716, a 3.3% win. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 115,107 versus 27,968, a 311.6% win.

Q: How close are the two cards in OpenCL compute performance?

A: They are very close. The RX 6800 leads by only 3.3% in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 24,508 against the FirePro D700's 23,716. This suggests the FirePro D700's GCN 1.0 architecture remains competitive for OpenCL workloads.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The Geekbench Vulkan test shows the largest difference. The RX 6800 scores 115,107, which is 311.6% higher than the FirePro D700's 27,968. This means the RX 6800 is over four times faster in Vulkan.

Q: Does the FirePro D700 have any advantages over the RX 6800?

A: The FirePro D700 has a wider 384-bit memory bus and 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 plus SDI display outputs. It also has a higher TDP of 274 W versus the RX 6800's 250 W, but that is not an advantage. Its OpenCL performance is nearly on par with the RX 6800, trailing by only 3.3%.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two cards?

A: The RX 6800 uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 7 nm process with 26,800 million transistors. The FirePro D700 uses GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process with 4,313 million transistors. The RX 6800 has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 60 ray tracing cores. The FirePro D700 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores.

Q: Which card has better memory specifications?

A: The RX 6800 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro D700 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 263.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6800 offers significantly more capacity and bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is enormous and explains nearly all the performance differences. The RX 6800 uses RDNA 2.0 architecture built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with 26,800 million transistors packed into a 520 mm² die. The FirePro D700 uses GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with only 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: 51.5 million transistors per mm² for the RX 6800 versus 12.3 million per mm² for the FirePro D700.

The RX 6800's RDNA 2.0 architecture brings several features that the FirePro D700's GCN 1.0 lacks. Most notably, the RX 6800 has 60 ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The FirePro D700 has no ray tracing hardware at all. The RX 6800 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading. The FirePro D700 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), an older feature level that lacks these modern capabilities.

The shading unit counts reflect the generational leap. The RX 6800 has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The FirePro D700 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and only 32 ROPs. This means the RX 6800 can process more pixels and textures per clock cycle. The pixel rate is 202.1 GPixel/s for the RX 6800 versus 27.20 GPixel/s for the FirePro D700, a 7.4x difference. The texture rate is 505.2 GTexel/s versus 108.8 GTexel/s, a 4.6x difference.

FP32 compute performance follows the same pattern. The RX 6800 delivers 16.17 TFLOPS, while the FirePro D700 manages 3.482 TFLOPS. That is a 4.6x advantage for the newer card. The RX 6800 also supports FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, delivering 32.33 TFLOPS, while the FirePro D700 has no recorded FP16 data. This makes the RX 6800 much more capable for AI and machine learning workloads that rely on half-precision math.

The memory subsystems also differ fundamentally. The RX 6800 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro D700 uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, achieving 263.0 GB/s. The wider bus on the FirePro D700 helps it compensate for the older memory technology, but the RX 6800 still delivers nearly double the bandwidth. The RX 6800's memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the FirePro D700's is 1370 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective).

The bus interface also differs. The RX 6800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the FirePro D700 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. This doubles the theoretical bandwidth between the GPU and the host system, which can matter for data-heavy workloads. The RX 6800 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro D700 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, another indication of the newer driver and hardware stack.

Specification Differences

The specifications where these two cards differ are extensive. The process node is 7 nm for the RX 6800 versus 28 nm for the FirePro D700. The RX 6800 has 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, while the FirePro D700 has 4,313 million on a 352 mm² die. The RX 6800's base clock is 1700 MHz with a boost clock of 2105 MHz and a game clock of 1815 MHz. The FirePro D700 has no recorded base, boost, or game clocks, only a memory clock of 1370 MHz.

Memory capacity is 16 GB of GDDR6 for the RX 6800 versus 6 GB of GDDR5 for the FirePro D700. The bus width is 256 bit for the RX 6800 versus 384 bit for the FirePro D700. Bandwidth is 512.0 GB/s versus 263.0 GB/s. The RX 6800 has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The FirePro D700 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6800 adds 60 ray tracing cores, which the FirePro D700 lacks.

Pixel rate is 202.1 GPixel/s for the RX 6800 versus 27.20 GPixel/s for the FirePro D700. Texture rate is 505.2 GTexel/s versus 108.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 16.17 TFLOPS versus 3.482 TFLOPS. FP16 is 32.33 TFLOPS (2:1) for the RX 6800, with no data for the FirePro D700. TDP is 250 W for the RX 6800 versus 274 W for the FirePro D700. Both use dual-slot coolers, but the RX 6800 has 2x 8-pin power connectors while the FirePro D700 has none recorded.

The RX 6800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the FirePro D700 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs differ significantly: the RX 6800 has 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C, while the FirePro D700 has 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI. The RX 6800 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro D700 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Physical dimensions also differ. The RX 6800 is 267 mm long (10.5 inches), 120 mm tall (4.7 inches), and 40 mm wide (1.6 inches). The FirePro D700 is 279 mm long (11 inches) with no recorded height or width. Both are dual-slot cards, and both have a suggested PSU of 600 W. The RX 6800 was released on 2020-10-27, while the FirePro D700 was released on 2014-01-17. Both are end-of-life products.