AMD FirePro S10000 vs Intel Arc Pro A30M Comparison

The AMD FirePro S10000 and Intel Arc Pro A30M represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. One is a dual-slot, power-hungry server card from 2012, the other a mobile-focused, power-efficient part from 2022. Despite these differences, their benchmark scores place them within a narrow band of overall performance, making their head-to-head comparison a study in how far efficiency and feature sets have come.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 against the AMD FirePro S10000’s 30,631. This gives the Intel card a 4% advantage, a modest but real lead. The data shows the Arc Pro A30M winning the sole head-to-head test, but the margin is narrow enough to suggest that in raw compute throughput, the two are near-peers.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the FirePro S10000’s average benchmark score of 32,388 positions it just ahead of the Arc Pro A30M’s 31,894. The FirePro’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, scores 32,456, a delta of -0.2% from the FirePro, meaning the FirePro is essentially tied with that modern card in average performance. The Arc Pro A30M, meanwhile, sits at a 0.7% delta above the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676), which is a remarkable result for a 50 W mobile part. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the FirePro scores 34,145, a figure that is not directly comparable to the Arc’s OpenCL-only result, but it indicates that the older card can still deliver strong API-specific performance.

The wins tally is decisive in one sense: Intel takes 1 win, AMD takes 0. However, the delta of -4% for the FirePro in OpenCL is small. For context, the FirePro’s average score is 1.5% higher than the Arc’s average score (32,388 vs 31,894), which suggests that across multiple workloads, the older card may hold a slight edge, even if the single tested benchmark favors Intel. The percentile ranks are nearly identical: the FirePro sits at the 77th percentile of all GPUs, while the Arc sits at the 76th. This means that in the grand scheme of GPU performance, both cards occupy the same tier, with the FirePro being marginally better positioned relative to the entire field.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is vast. The FirePro S10000 uses the Tahiti chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, a 28 nm design from TSMC containing 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. The Arc Pro A30M uses the DG2-128 chip on Xe-HPG architecture, a 6 nm design from the same foundry, packing 7,200 million transistors into a much smaller 157 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: the FirePro has 12.3M transistors per mm², while the Arc has 45.9M per mm², a 3.7x improvement in packing efficiency.

The FirePro’s GCN 1.0 architecture was designed for compute-heavy workloads, with 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Arc Pro A30M has fewer shading units (1,024) and TMUs (64), but the same 32 ROPs. Crucially, the Arc includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature that simply did not exist in the FirePro’s era. The FirePro has no RT cores, and its FP32 throughput is 3.405 TFLOPS versus the Arc’s 4.096 TFLOPS. The Arc also supports FP16 at 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1), while the FirePro has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory subsystems differ sharply. The FirePro uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, producing only 128.0 GB/s. This is a 46% reduction in bandwidth, yet the Arc still outperforms the FirePro in OpenCL, highlighting the efficiency of the newer memory controller and architecture. Clock speeds also favor the Arc: the FirePro runs at 825 MHz base and 950 MHz boost, while the Arc runs at 1500 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. The Arc’s pixel rate is 64.00 GPixel/s versus the FirePro’s 30.40 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 128.0 GTexel/s versus 106.4 GTexel/s.

Power consumption is where the two diverge most dramatically. The FirePro has a TDP of 375 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and suggests a 750 W PSU. The Arc Pro A30M has a TDP of 50 W, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU. The FirePro is a dual-slot card measuring 305 mm in length and 111 mm in height; the Arc has no listed dimensions because it is a mobile part with portable-device-dependent display outputs. The FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Arc uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which on paper offers similar bandwidth but with a newer protocol.

API support also reflects the generational gap. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Arc supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc’s Vulkan 1.4 support is significantly newer, and DirectX 12 Ultimate includes features like ray tracing and mesh shaders that the FirePro cannot access.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 has an average benchmark score of 32,388, which is 1.5% higher than the Intel Arc Pro A30M’s 31,894.

Q: What is the performance difference in the single head-to-head test?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 versus the AMD FirePro S10000’s 30,631, giving Intel a 4% lead.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro S10000 offers 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth from a 384-bit GDDR5 bus, while the Arc Pro A30M offers 128.0 GB/s from a 64-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: Does the Intel card support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc Pro A30M includes 8 ray tracing cores, whereas the AMD FirePro S10000 has no ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the TDPs of these two cards?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 has a TDP of 375 W, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M has a TDP of 50 W.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A30M boosts to 2000 MHz, while the AMD FirePro S10000 boosts to 950 MHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro S10000 | Intel Arc Pro A30M |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 4,313 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 352 mm² | 157 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 45.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 825 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 950 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 3 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 240.0 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 112 | 64 |

| RT Cores | None | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 30.40 GPixel/s | 64.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 106.4 GTexel/s | 128.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.405 TFLOPS | 4.096 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 8.192 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 375 W | 50 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 750 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2012-11-11 | 2022-08-07 |

| Launch MSRP | 3,599 USD | Not listed |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split: the AMD FirePro S10000 is a product of its time, built for raw compute with a massive 375 W power budget and a 384-bit memory bus. Its average benchmark score of 32,388 is marginally higher than the Intel Arc Pro A30M’s 31,894, and it holds a 77th percentile rank versus Intel’s 76th. For workloads that are bandwidth-sensitive or rely on the FirePro’s 112 TMUs and 1792 shading units, the older card can still hold its own, especially given its 240.0 GB/s bandwidth advantage.

The Intel Arc Pro A30M, however, wins the only direct head-to-head test, and does so while consuming just 50 W. Its 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 performance exceeds the FirePro’s 3.405 TFLOPS, and its 2000 MHz boost clock is more than double the FirePro’s 950 MHz. The inclusion of 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support means the Arc can handle modern rendering features that the FirePro cannot. Its 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while on a narrower 64-bit bus, is larger in capacity and faster in effective speed (16 Gbps vs 5 Gbps).

For users prioritizing absolute compute throughput in legacy applications, the FirePro S10000’s higher average score and superior memory bandwidth make it a defensible choice, provided they can accommodate its 375 W TDP and 305 mm length. For anyone needing a modern feature set, ray tracing support, or a drastically more efficient solution, the Intel Arc Pro A30M is the data-supported pick. The 4% lead in OpenCL, combined with the 50 W TDP, suggests that the Arc offers comparable performance with a fraction of the power draw. The FirePro’s launch MSRP of 3,599 USD reflects its enterprise positioning, but that price is historical; the Arc’s lack of a launch MSRP indicates a different market segment entirely. Ultimately, the benchmark results indicate that the Intel card is the more versatile and future-proof option, while the AMD card remains a competent, if dated, compute specialist.