AMD FirePro S10000 vs AMD Radeon RX 5300M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single head-to-head benchmark between the AMD Radeon RX 5300M and the AMD FirePro S10000: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the RX 5300M scores 36,529 points, while the FirePro S10000 scores 30,631 points. This gives the RX 5300M a decisive 19.3% advantage in raw OpenCL compute performance. That is a substantial margin, indicating a generational leap in compute efficiency rather than a marginal refinement.

Contextualizing the RX 5300M score further, it sits at the 80th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X at 36,530 points (a 0% delta, essentially a tie), the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 at 37,157 points (1.7% faster), the NVIDIA T1000 at 36,289 points (0.7% slower), and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo at 35,860 points (1.9% slower). The RX 5300M is therefore placed in a tight cluster of mid-to-high-range cards, where a few percentage points separate it from its competitors.

The FirePro S10000, on the other hand, scores 30,631 points in OpenCL and 34,145 points in Vulkan, with an average benchmark score of 32,388 across both tests. Its percentile rank is 77th, placing it slightly below the RX 5300M in overall standing. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE at 32,456 points (0.2% faster), the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 at 32,540 points (0.5% faster), the AMD Radeon Pro 570X at 32,176 points (0.7% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME at 32,601 points (0.7% faster). This places the FirePro S10000 in a slightly lower performance band, but not dramatically so; it is within a couple of percentage points of its immediate neighbors.

Notably, the FirePro S10000 does have a Vulkan score recorded, which the RX 5300M lacks in this dataset. This means the FirePro S10000 demonstrates API versatility, but its Vulkan score of 34,145 still falls short of the RX 5300M's OpenCL result of 36,529. For a direct compute comparison, the RX 5300M is the clear winner in the only shared test, with a 19.3% lead.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5300M is faster, scoring 36,529 points versus the AMD FirePro S10000's 30,631 points, a 19.3% difference in favor of the RX 5300M.

Q: How does the FirePro S10000 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The FirePro S10000 has an average benchmark score of 32,388. It is 0.2% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32,456), 0.5% slower than the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (32,540), 0.7% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro 570X (32,176), and 0.7% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (32,601).

Q: Does the RX 5300M have a Vulkan benchmark score?

A: No, the database records only a Geekbench OpenCL score (36,529) for the RX 5300M. The FirePro S10000, by contrast, has both OpenCL (30,631) and Vulkan (34,145) scores.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The RX 5300M ranks in the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro S10000 ranks in the 77th percentile. This indicates the RX 5300M sits slightly higher in the overall performance distribution.

Q: Which GPU has a higher texture fill rate?

A: The RX 5300M has a texture rate of 127.2 GTexel/s, while the FirePro S10000 has 106.4 GTexel/s. The RX 5300M is ahead by approximately 20 GTexel/s.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life products?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon RX 5300M and the AMD FirePro S10000 are listed as end-of-life production status in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M is built on the Navi 14 chip using the RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 6,400 million transistors into a die size of 158 mm², yielding a transistor density of 40.5 million per mm². This is a modern, dense design that prioritizes power efficiency and high clock speeds.

The AMD FirePro S10000, in contrast, uses the Tahiti chip based on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It contains 4,313 million transistors across a much larger die of 352 mm², resulting in a lower transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The architectural gap is significant: RDNA 1.0 is a streamlined gaming-oriented design, while GCN 1.0 is a compute-first architecture from an earlier era.

The RX 5300M features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 46.24 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 127.2 GTexel/s. It supports FP32 at 4.069 TFLOPS and FP16 at 8.138 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The FirePro S10000 has more shading units (1,792) and more TMUs (112), but the same 32 ROPs. Despite the higher unit counts, its pixel rate is lower at 30.40 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is lower at 106.4 GTexel/s. Its FP32 throughput is 3.405 TFLOPS, and it has no recorded FP16 capability.

Clock speeds differ sharply. The RX 5300M runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz, a boost of 1445 MHz, and a game clock of 1181 MHz. The FirePro S10000 operates at a base of 825 MHz and a boost of 950 MHz, with no game clock specified. This clock advantage, combined with the newer architecture, explains the RX 5300M's higher measured performance despite fewer shading units. The FirePro S10000 also has no RT cores or tensor cores, and neither does the RX 5300M.

Specification Differences

Memory configuration is a key differentiator. The RX 5300M uses 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 168.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro S10000 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro S10000 wins on raw bandwidth due to its wider bus, even though its memory clock is lower (1250 MHz versus 1750 MHz for the RX 5300M, with 5 Gbps effective versus 14 Gbps effective).

Power requirements diverge dramatically. The RX 5300M has a TDP of 85 W and uses no external power connectors, indicating a mobile-oriented design. The FirePro S10000 has a TDP of 375 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 750 W. The FirePro S10000 is a dual-slot card measuring 305 mm in length and 111 mm in height, whereas the RX 5300M has no recorded dimensions or slot width, consistent with a laptop part.

Bus interface differences are notable: the RX 5300M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro S10000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the RX 5300M is listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the FirePro S10000 offers 1x DVI and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. API support is similar but not identical: both support DirectX 12 (the RX 5300M at 12_1, the FirePro S10000 at 11_1) and OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan support differs, with the RX 5300M at version 1.4 and the FirePro S10000 at version 1.2.170.

The FirePro S10000 has a launch MSRP of 3,599 USD, which can be stated once as a historical reference. The RX 5300M has no launch MSRP recorded. Release dates are far apart: the RX 5300M launched on November 12, 2019, while the FirePro S10000 launched on November 11, 2012. The predecessor and successor lineage also differs: the RX 5300M's predecessor is Polaris Mobile with no successor listed, while the FirePro S10000's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro GCN.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M wins the only head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by 19.3%. It also has significantly higher clock speeds (boost 1445 MHz versus 950 MHz), a newer process node (7 nm versus 28 nm), higher pixel rate (46.24 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (127.2 GTexel/s versus 106.4 GTexel/s), and higher FP32 throughput (4.069 TFLOPS versus 3.405 TFLOPS). It supports FP16 compute, which the FirePro S10000 does not record. Its power draw is a fraction of the FirePro S10000's, making it suitable for mobile or low-power applications. It also supports a newer PCIe interface (4.0 versus 3.0) and a higher Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.170).

The AMD FirePro S10000 wins on memory bandwidth, delivering 240.0 GB/s versus 168.0 GB/s, due to its wider 384-bit bus. It also has more shading units (1,792 versus 1,408) and more texture mapping units (112 versus 88). Its Vulkan score, at 34,145 points, provides an additional data point for API-specific workloads, though it is still below the RX 5300M's OpenCL score. The FirePro S10000 also offers a full-size PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and multiple display outputs, making it a traditional desktop workstation card with more connectivity options.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon RX 5300M as the stronger performer in compute workloads, with a 19.3% lead in OpenCL and a higher overall percentile rank (80th versus 77th). Its modern RDNA 1.0 architecture, faster clocks, and lower power envelope make it the more efficient and capable GPU for general compute tasks. For users prioritizing raw OpenCL performance, power efficiency, and a compact footprint, the RX 5300M is the clear choice.

The AMD FirePro S10000 is not without merit. Its higher memory bandwidth (240.0 GB/s) and larger shading unit count could favor memory-bound or highly parallel workloads that saturate the 384-bit bus. Its Vulkan score of 34,145 also indicates cross-API viability. However, its 375 W TDP, dual-slot size, and older GCN 1.0 architecture place it at a disadvantage in both performance and practicality. The launch MSRP of 3,599 USD underscores its original high-end workstation positioning, but the benchmark results do not justify that tier today.

For a modern user selecting between these two end-of-life GPUs, the RX 5300M offers better compute performance per watt and per dollar of physical footprint. The FirePro S10000 is only preferable in scenarios where maximum memory bandwidth is the sole bottleneck and power consumption is not a concern. Otherwise, the RX 5300M is the recommended pick based on the recorded measurements.