AMD FirePro S10000 vs AMD FirePro W8000 Comparison

The AMD FirePro S10000 and AMD FirePro W8000 are two professional workstation cards built on the same Tahiti silicon and the GCN 1.0 architecture. They target different segments of the market, with the S10000 aimed at server and compute workloads while the W8000 is a more conventional workstation solution. Benchmark data in the database shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the gap between them varies significantly depending on the workload.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results in the database show the AMD FirePro S10000 winning both recorded tests. Its most dominant victory comes in the Geekbench OpenCL compute test, where it scores 30631 compared to the W8000's 24440. That is a 25.3% advantage, a substantial margin that reflects the S10000's higher clock speeds and memory bandwidth. For compute-heavy professional workloads, such as rendering, simulation, or data processing, the S10000 is clearly the stronger card.

The Vulkan test tells a much closer story. The S10000 scores 34145, while the W8000 is right behind at 33981. The difference is only 0.5%, effectively a tie in real-world terms. This suggests that for graphics-oriented or Vulkan-accelerated tasks, the two cards deliver nearly identical performance. The W8000's lower power draw and smaller physical footprint might make it the more practical choice for a workstation where compute performance is not the sole priority.

Looking at the overall average benchmark score, the S10000 sits at 32388, placing it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE at 32456 (0.2% higher), the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 at 32540 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME at 32601 (0.7% higher). The S10000 also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro 570X by 0.7%. These are tight margins, meaning the S10000 performs at a level comparable to these modern cards despite its age.

The W8000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 29211, which lands it in the 75th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH at 29197 (a 0% difference), the Intel Arc A370M at 29175 (0.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996 (0.7% higher). The AMD Radeon RX 6800M sits 1.2% behind. The W8000's position in this grouping shows that it holds up well against a mix of integrated and discrete solutions from later generations, though it trails the S10000 by a significant 10.9% in average score.

Architecture Differences

Both cards use the same Tahiti chip, built on TSMC's 28 nm process node. Each has 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The architecture is GCN 1.0 for both, and both are part of AMD's professional lineup, though from different generations: the S10000 belongs to the FirePro Server (Sx000) family, while the W8000 is from the FirePro GCN (Wx000) family.

The compute core configuration is identical. Both cards feature 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The fundamental difference lies in how these cores are clocked and how the memory subsystem is configured.

The S10000 has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 950 MHz. The W8000's clock speeds are not listed in the database, making direct clock-to-clock comparison impossible. However, the S10000's higher pixel rate of 30.40 GPixel/s versus 28.80 GPixel/s for the W8000, and its texture rate of 106.4 GTexel/s versus 100.8 GTexel/s, indicate that the S10000 is running at higher frequencies. This translates to a FP32 compute figure of 3.405 TFLOPS for the S10000, compared to 3.226 TFLOPS for the W8000.

Memory configuration is another major separator. The S10000 comes with 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory runs at 1250 MHz with an effective data rate of 5 Gbps. The W8000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a narrower 256-bit bus, resulting in 176.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is higher at 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective, but the narrower bus limits overall throughput. The S10000's bandwidth advantage of 64 GB/s is critical for memory-intensive compute workloads.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The S10000 has a TDP of 375 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and needs a 750 W power supply. The W8000 draws 225 W, uses two 6-pin connectors, and is rated for a 550 W supply. Both are dual-slot cards, but the S10000 is longer at 305 mm (12 inches) versus 279 mm (11 inches) for the W8000. Both are 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall. Display outputs differ as well: the S10000 offers one DVI port and four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the W8000 provides four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and one SDI connection.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 leads decisively in OpenCL compute. It scores 30631 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 25.3% higher than the W8000's 24440. This advantage comes from its higher clock speeds and much larger memory bandwidth.

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

A: The gap nearly disappears in Vulkan. The S10000 scores 34145, and the W8000 scores 33981, a difference of just 0.5%. For Vulkan-based graphics applications, users should expect effectively identical performance from either card.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The S10000 has 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 240.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W8000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 176.0 GB/s bandwidth. The S10000 has higher bandwidth, while the W8000 has more capacity.

Q: Do the cards share the same GPU architecture?

A: Yes. Both use the Tahiti chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. They both have 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die and identical core counts: 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs.

Q: Which card has lower power requirements?

A: The W8000 is far more power-efficient. Its TDP is 225 W with two 6-pin connectors and a suggested 550 W power supply. The S10000 draws 375 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, and needs a 750 W power supply.

Q: How do the cards compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The S10000's average benchmark score of 32388 places it within 0.7% of cards like the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, AMD FirePro S9300 X2, and AMD Radeon RX 590 GME. The W8000's average of 29211 matches closely with the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and Intel Arc A370M, with differences of 0% and 0.1% respectively.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specification areas, despite sharing the same GPU core.

• Clock speeds: The S10000 has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 950 MHz. The W8000's clocks are not recorded in the database.
• Memory clock: The S10000 runs memory at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The W8000 runs memory at 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: The S10000 has 3 GB. The W8000 has 4 GB.
• Memory bus width: The S10000 uses a 384-bit bus. The W8000 uses a 256-bit bus.
• Memory bandwidth: The S10000 delivers 240.0 GB/s. The W8000 delivers 176.0 GB/s.
• Pixel rate: The S10000 achieves 30.40 GPixel/s. The W8000 achieves 28.80 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: The S10000 achieves 106.4 GTexel/s. The W8000 achieves 100.8 GTexel/s.
• FP32 compute: The S10000 is rated at 3.405 TFLOPS. The W8000 is rated at 3.226 TFLOPS.
• TDP: The S10000 draws 375 W. The W8000 draws 225 W.
• Power connectors: The S10000 requires 2x 8-pin. The W8000 requires 2x 6-pin.
• Suggested PSU: The S10000 needs 750 W. The W8000 needs 550 W.
• Dimensions: The S10000 is 305 mm (12 inches) long. The W8000 is 279 mm (11 inches) long. Both are 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall.
• Display outputs: The S10000 has 1x DVI and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The W8000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI.
• Generation: The S10000 is from the FirePro Server (Sx000) family. The W8000 is from the FirePro GCN (Wx000) family.
• Release date: The S10000 was released later, on November 11, 2012. The W8000 came earlier, on June 13, 2012.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark results between these cards. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD FirePro S10000 scores 30631 against the W8000's 24440. This is a 25.3% advantage for the S10000, the largest performance gap in any test. The second is Geekbench Vulkan, where the S10000 scores 34145 and the W8000 scores 33981. The S10000 wins by only 0.5%, a margin that falls well within normal run-to-run variance.

The OpenCL result tells the more interesting story. A 25.3% lead is substantial, and it aligns perfectly with the hardware differences. The S10000's higher clocks push its FP32 throughput to 3.405 TFLOPS versus 3.226 TFLOPS for the W8000, a 5.5% raw compute advantage. But the real differentiator is memory bandwidth: 240.0 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s, a 36.4% gap. OpenCL workloads, especially those that stream large datasets through memory, benefit enormously from bandwidth. The S10000's 384-bit bus is the reason it can outpace the W8000 so convincingly in this test.

The Vulkan result is a different animal. Vulkan workloads often rely more on geometry processing and draw call throughput than raw memory streaming. Since both cards share the same 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, their graphics throughput is nearly identical. The 0.5% edge for the S10000 in Vulkan is consistent with its slightly higher pixel and texture rates. The W8000's lower memory bandwidth does not cripple it here because Vulkan graphics workloads are less bandwidth-bound than compute workloads.

The overall average benchmark scores reinforce this pattern. The S10000 averages 32388, while the W8000 averages 29211, a 10.9% difference. The S10000's position in the 77th percentile of all GPUs puts it in the same league as much newer cards like the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, which scores 32456 and is only 0.2% higher. The W8000, at the 75th percentile, sits alongside the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and Intel Arc A370M, with a 0% and 0.1% difference respectively.

It is importantly the S10000's nearest rival list includes the AMD FirePro S9300 X2, another server-class card, which scores 32540 and is 0.5% higher. The W8000's rival list is dominated by consumer and mobile parts, including the AMD Radeon RX 470 and AMD Radeon RX 6800M, which are 0.7% lower and 1.2% lower respectively. This contrast in rival groups highlights the different market positioning of the two cards. The S10000 competes in the high-performance server tier, while the W8000 sits in the mid-range workstation tier.

Both cards are end-of-life products from 2012, with the W8000 launching on June 13, 2012 and the S10000 on November 11, 2012. The S10000 has a launch MSRP of 3,599 USD, while the W8000 has a launch MSRP of 1,599 USD. Both succeed the FirePro Terascale predecessors and successors in their respective lines: the S10000 leads to Radeon Pro GCN and the W8000 to Radeon Pro Polaris. The architectural lineage remains intact through GCN 1.0, but the W8000's successor shift to Polaris and the S10000's successor on Radeon Pro GCN show divergent paths from the same starting point.

For professionals choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload type and power budget. The S10000 is the right choice for compute-heavy applications where its 25.3% OpenCL lead and 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth will be fully utilized. The W8000 is the more sensible pick for general workstation use, especially where its 225 W TDP, 4 GB of memory, and SDI output are valued. The 0.5% Vulkan gap means graphics performance is effectively a wash, making the W8000 the more balanced option for mixed workloads.