AMD FirePro S10000 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear, if not overwhelming, advantage for the AMD FirePro S10000 across both synthetic workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the FirePro S10000 scores 30,631 against the Radeon RX Vega M GH's 27,125, a decisive 12.9% lead. This is the larger of the two gaps, suggesting the FirePro's compute-oriented design holds a meaningful edge in general-purpose GPU workloads that stress raw parallel throughput.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though the margin narrows considerably. The FirePro S10000 posts 34,145, while the Radeon RX Vega M GH manages 31,268, giving the older card a 9.2% advantage. This smaller delta in Vulkan is noteworthy, as it implies the Vega M GH's newer architecture closes some of the gap in modern graphics APIs, even while remaining behind overall.

When placed next to their respective peer groups, both cards sit in remarkably similar territory. The FirePro S10000's average benchmark score of 32,388 places it within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32,456) and 0.5% behind the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (32,540). It also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro 570X by 0.7% (32,176) and trails the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME by 0.7% (32,601). The picture is one of a card that, despite its age, sits squarely in a competitive performance band.

The Radeon RX Vega M GH, with an average score of 29,197, is essentially tied with the AMD FirePro W8000, which scores 29,211, a 0% difference. It leads the Intel Arc A370M by 0.1% (29,175) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 by 0.7% (28,996), while also outpacing the AMD Radeon RX 6800M by 1.1% (28,874). The data indicates that the Vega M GH holds its own against a diverse set of rivals, though its percentile ranking of 74 versus the FirePro's 77 reinforces the latter's higher overall standing in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head data gives the FirePro S10000 two wins out of two benchmarks, which is a strong statement about its compute capabilities. Its 12.9% OpenCL margin is the standout result, indicating that workloads built around OpenCL, such as scientific simulation, image processing, or financial modeling, would favor the FirePro significantly. The architecture behind this win, GCN 1.0, was designed for heavy throughput, and the numbers back that up.

The Radeon RX Vega M GH, despite losing both tests, shows its strongest relative performance in the Vulkan benchmark. A 9.2% deficit is far less severe than the 12.9% OpenCL gap, which suggests that newer API workloads, particularly those found in gaming or real-time rendering, are where the Vega M GH is most competitive. Its GCN 4.0 architecture, paired with support for Vulkan 1.3, gives it a modern software foundation that the FirePro's Vulkan 1.2.170 cannot match.

For users prioritizing compute-heavy tasks, the FirePro S10000 is the clear choice based on the data. For those working with Vulkan-based applications, the Vega M GH is closer to parity, though it still trails. The FirePro also wins on sheer pixel throughput, delivering 30.40 GPixel/s, but the Vega M GH counters with a much higher 76.16 GPixel/s, indicating it would handle rasterization-heavy workloads more efficiently. This split, compute versus rasterization, defines the use-case divide between the two.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000, with an average score of 32,388, compared to the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH's 29,197.

Q: How large is the FirePro S10000's lead in OpenCL?

A: The FirePro S10000 scores 30,631 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 12.9% higher than the Vega M GH's 27,125.

Q: Does the Radeon RX Vega M GH win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No, the data shows the FirePro S10000 winning both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, with the Vega M GH having zero wins.

Q: How does the Radeon RX Vega M GH compare to the AMD Radeon RX 6800M?

A: The Vega M GH averages 29,197, which is 1.1% higher than the Radeon RX 6800M's 28,874.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The FirePro S10000 has 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Vega M GH has 204.8 GB/s.

Q: Which card supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The Radeon RX Vega M GH supports Vulkan 1.3, whereas the FirePro S10000 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply on nearly every major specification. The FirePro S10000 uses GDDR5 memory at 5 Gbps effective speed on a 384-bit bus, yielding 240.0 GB/s across 3 GB of capacity. The Radeon RX Vega M GH instead uses HBM2 memory at 1600 Mbps effective, on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s across 4 GB. The Vega M GH has more memory capacity and a wider bus, but the FirePro still achieves higher absolute bandwidth.

Clock speeds also favor the Vega M GH. Its base clock is 1063 MHz with a boost of 1190 MHz, while the FirePro S10000 runs at 825 MHz base and 950 MHz boost. The Vega M GH's memory clock is much lower at 800 MHz compared to the FirePro's 1250 MHz, but the type of memory and bus width change the performance picture.

The compute configurations differ in several ways. The FirePro S10000 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Vega M GH has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The FirePro has more shading and texture units, but the Vega M GH has double the ROPs, which explains its much higher pixel rate of 76.16 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s. Texture rates are close, with the Vega M GH at 114.2 GTexel/s and the FirePro at 106.4 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is nearly identical, with the Vega M GH at 3.656 TFLOPS and the FirePro at 3.405 TFLOPS.

Thermal and physical characteristics are stark. The FirePro S10000 has a TDP of 375 W, requires a dual-slot cooler, two 8-pin power connectors, and a 750 W suggested power supply. The Vega M GH is an integrated graphics processor with a 100 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The FirePro is a 305 mm long PCIe 3.0 x16 card, while the Vega M GH is an IGP with no dimensions recorded.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The FirePro S10000 is built on GCN 1.0 using the Tahiti chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,313 million transistors into a 352 mm² die, with a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The Vega M GH, on the other hand, uses GCN 4.0 with the Polaris 22 chip, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It houses 5,000 million transistors in a 208 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 24.0 million per square millimeter.

The Vega M GH supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the FirePro S10000 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Both share OpenGL 4.6 support, but the Vega M GH's Vulkan 1.3 support is newer than the FirePro's 1.2.170. The Vega M GH also offers FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 3.656 TFLOPS, while the FirePro S10000 has no recorded FP16 capability. This makes the Vega M GH more versatile for workloads that leverage half-precision math.

The FirePro S10000 was released in 2012 and is part of the FirePro Server generation, with a predecessor in FirePro Terascale and a successor in Radeon Pro GCN. The Vega M GH came later, released in 2018, and belongs to the Vega generation. Its production status is end-of-life, as is the FirePro's. The Vega M GH has no recorded predecessor or successor, reflecting its role as a specialized integrated solution. The FirePro S10000's launch MSRP was 3,599 USD.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward conclusion for compute-oriented users: the AMD FirePro S10000 is the stronger card. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, leads by 12.9% in OpenCL and 9.2% in Vulkan, and holds a higher percentile ranking at 77 versus 74. Its average score of 32,388 places it in company with much newer discrete GPUs like the Radeon RX 7900 GRE, which is remarkable for a card from 2012. The 375 W TDP and dual-slot design are the price of that performance, but the numbers justify the power draw for workloads that rely on OpenCL.

The Radeon RX Vega M GH, despite its losses, is not without merit. It is an integrated part with a 100 W TDP, making it dramatically more power-efficient. Its pixel rate of 76.16 GPixel/s is more than double the FirePro's, and its FP16 support adds flexibility. For users constrained by power or space, or those working in Vulkan-centric environments where the gap narrows to 9.2%, the Vega M GH is a valid option. It also offers more memory at 4 GB, wider bus at 1024-bit, and modern API support.

The choice depends on priorities. If raw compute throughput and OpenCL performance are the goal, the FirePro S10000 is the clear winner according to the data. If efficiency, newer architecture, and rasterization throughput matter more, the Radeon RX Vega M GH makes a compelling case despite trailing in the benchmarks. The FirePro wins the performance crown, but the Vega M GH wins on adaptability and operational efficiency.