AMD FirePro S10000 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two AMD workstation-class cards, but not in the way the raw average scores might suggest. The Radeon RX Vega 56 posts an average benchmark score of 37507, while the FirePro S10000 trails at 32388, a gap of roughly 16% in favor of the newer card. However, the two cards excel in different test environments, and each has a distinct profile.

The RX Vega 56 wins decisively in DirectX 12 workloads. Its recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1501 demonstrates modern API proficiency, a domain where the FirePro S10000 has no comparable entry in the database. The FirePro S10000, by contrast, shows strength in OpenCL and Vulkan compute scenarios. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 30631 and Vulkan score of 34145 represent the only benchmarks recorded for that card, and they are respectable figures for a product from its generation.

Looking at the percentile rankings, the RX Vega 56 sits at the 81st percentile among all GPUs, while the FirePro S10000 reaches the 77th percentile. This places both cards in the upper tier of the database, though the RX Vega 56 holds a clear edge in overall standing. The nearest rivals for the RX Vega 56 include the NVIDIA Tesla P4 at 37628 (0.3% ahead), the GeForce RTX 4070 at 37648 (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 at 37157 (0.9% behind). For the FirePro S10000, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE at 32456 sits 0.2% ahead, and the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 at 32540 is 0.5% ahead.

The use-case split is clear. The RX Vega 56 wins where modern DirectX 12 rendering is required, and it also benefits from a much higher FP32 throughput of 10.54 TFLOPS versus 3.405 TFLOPS for the FirePro S10000. The FirePro S10000 wins in pure compute-oriented OpenCL and Vulkan tasks relative to its own generation, but its lower raw compute means it cannot match the Vega 56 in heavily shader-bound workloads. The data shows no head-to-head benchmark wins for either card (both winsA and winsB are 0), so the comparison relies entirely on the separately recorded benchmarks and architectural metrics.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards spans five full generations of GCN. The RX Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated at 14 nm by GlobalFoundries. The FirePro S10000 uses the Tahiti chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated at 28 nm by TSMC. This node difference alone explains much of the efficiency and performance disparity.

The transistor counts tell a stark story. The Vega 10 chip packs 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3 million per mm². The Tahiti chip holds 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, with a density of 12.3 million per mm². The Vega 10 has roughly three times the transistor count on a die that is only about 40% larger, reflecting the density advantage of the newer process node.

Shader resources differ dramatically. The RX Vega 56 provides 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The FirePro S10000 offers 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. In every category, the Vega 56 has exactly double the resources of the FirePro S10000. This doubling carries through to the pixel and texture rates: the Vega 56 achieves 94.14 GPixel/s and 329.5 GTexel/s, while the FirePro S10000 manages 30.40 GPixel/s and 106.4 GTexel/s.

Memory subsystems also diverge sharply. The RX Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro S10000 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, providing 240.0 GB/s. The Vega 56 offers 170 GB/s more bandwidth, which is critical for high-resolution textures and compute workloads that hammer memory. The FirePro S10000's smaller capacity and narrower bus limit its ability to feed its shader array, though its older architecture is less bandwidth-hungry.

Clock speeds favor the newer card as well. The RX Vega 56 runs at a base of 1156 MHz and boosts to 1471 MHz, with memory at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). The FirePro S10000 runs at 825 MHz base and 950 MHz boost, with memory at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The Vega 56's higher core clocks combine with its doubled resource count to produce its compute advantage.

API support differs meaningfully. The RX Vega 56 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The FirePro S10000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX 12 feature level difference (12_1 versus 11_1) is significant for modern games and applications. The Vega 56 also has a 2:1 FP16 rate of 21.09 TFLOPS, while the FirePro S10000 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The RX Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro S10000 draws 375 W and needs a 750 W PSU. Both cards are dual-slot and use 2x 8-pin power connectors. The FirePro S10000 is longer at 305 mm (12 inches) versus 280 mm (11 inches) for the Vega 56, but both are 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall. The Vega 56 is 40 mm (1.6 inches) wide; the FirePro S10000 has no recorded width.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear overall winner: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56. It holds a 5119-point average benchmark advantage over the FirePro S10000, sits higher in the percentile ranking (81st versus 77th), and offers more than triple the FP32 compute throughput (10.54 TFLOPS versus 3.405 TFLOPS). The Vega 56 also doubles the FirePro S10000's shader units, TMUs, and ROPs, and provides 409.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 240.0 GB/s.

For users choosing between these two, the decision depends heavily on workload. The RX Vega 56 is the appropriate pick for DirectX 12 applications, modern Vulkan workloads, and any task that benefits from high FP32 throughput or FP16 acceleration. Its 8 GB HBM2 memory is also more suited to large datasets than the FirePro S10000's 3 GB GDDR5.

The FirePro S10000 remains relevant only in legacy compute scenarios where its OpenCL performance (30631) and Vulkan performance (34145) are acceptable and where its 375 W power draw is not a constraint. Its 3 GB memory capacity and 240.0 GB/s bandwidth are limiting factors. The data does not support recommending the FirePro S10000 for any workload where the RX Vega 56 is available, given the latter's superior metrics across every architectural category.

The RX Vega 56 is the better choice for nearly all modern workloads. The FirePro S10000 is a historical artifact with respectable compute scores for its generation, but it is outclassed in every measurable way.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The RX Vega 56 averages 37507, while the FirePro S10000 averages 32388. The Vega 56 leads by 5119 points.

Q: How do their DirectX 12 capabilities compare?

A: The RX Vega 56 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1501. The FirePro S10000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and has no recorded DX12 benchmark.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth, and by how much?

A: The RX Vega 56 provides 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth from 8 GB HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The FirePro S10000 provides 240.0 GB/s from 3 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The Vega 56 has 169.6 GB/s more bandwidth.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures for each card?

A: The RX Vega 56 delivers 10.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The FirePro S10000 delivers 3.405 TFLOPS. The Vega 56 is approximately 3.1 times faster in FP32.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The RX Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The FirePro S10000 has a TDP of 375 W and a suggested PSU of 750 W.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RX Vega 56 ranks at the 81st percentile, while the FirePro S10000 ranks at the 77th percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two cards (the headToHeadBenchmarks list is empty, and both winsA and winsB are 0). However, the separately recorded benchmarks provide a basis for comparison across different test suites.

The RX Vega 56 shows its strength in DirectX 12 through the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, scoring 1501. This is the only DirectX 12 benchmark recorded for either card, and it demonstrates that the Vega 56 can handle modern API workloads that the FirePro S10000 cannot even attempt within the database. The FirePro S10000 has no equivalent DX12 score, which limits direct comparison in that domain.

In Geekbench tests, the comparison flips. The FirePro S10000 records an OpenCL score of 30631 and a Vulkan score of 34145. The RX Vega 56 records a Metal score of 73512, which is a different API entirely. While these are not directly comparable, the Vega 56's Metal score is substantially higher in absolute terms, suggesting strong compute performance on Apple platforms.

The nearest rival data provides context. For the RX Vega 56, the NVIDIA Tesla P4 scores 37628 (0.3% higher), the GeForce RTX 4070 scores 37648 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores 37157 (0.9% lower). The Vega 56 sits within 1% of all three, indicating it is competitive with a wide range of modern cards. For the FirePro S10000, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE scores 32456 (0.2% higher), the FirePro S9300 X2 scores 32540 (0.5% higher), and the Radeon Pro 570X scores 32176 (0.7% lower). The FirePro S10000 also sits within 1% of its nearest rivals.

The biggest win for the RX Vega 56 comes from architectural metrics rather than a single benchmark. Its FP32 throughput of 10.54 TFLOPS is 3.1 times the FirePro S10000's 3.405 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 94.14 GPixel/s is 3.1 times the FirePro S10000's 30.40 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 329.5 GTexel/s is 3.1 times the FirePro S10000's 106.4 GTexel/s. These ratios hold consistently because the Vega 56 doubles the shader units, TMUs, and ROPs while also running at higher clocks.

The FirePro S10000's best showing comes from its Vulkan score of 34145, which is competitive with its nearest rivals despite its older architecture. Its OpenCL score of 30631 also demonstrates that the GCN 1.0 design remains functional for compute tasks. However, the 28 nm node and 375 W TDP put it at a significant efficiency disadvantage compared to the 14 nm Vega 56, which delivers far more performance at 210 W.

The average benchmark score gap of 5119 points (37507 versus 32388) represents a 15.8% advantage for the RX Vega 56. This is the most direct overall comparison available in the database, and it aligns with the architectural advantages in every category. The data consistently favors the RX Vega 56 across compute, memory, and API support, making it the stronger card by a substantial margin.