AMD FirePro S10000 vs NVIDIA Quadro GV100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro GV100 scores 150004 against the AMD FirePro S10000's 30631, a delta of 389.7% in favor of the NVIDIA card. That is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm. The Geekbench Vulkan result follows the same pattern, with the Quadro GV100 posting 139526 versus 34145 for the FirePro S10000, a 308.6% advantage.

These deltas are so large that they render the comparison almost symbolic rather than competitive. The FirePro S10000, when measured against its own nearest rivals in the database, sits within a very tight cluster: its average benchmark score of 32388 is only 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, 0.5% behind the AMD FirePro S9300 X2, and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 570X. The Quadro GV100, by contrast, occupies a higher performance tier entirely, with its average of 35520 landing 2.4% ahead of the NVIDIA A2 and 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, while trailing the NVIDIA T1000 by 2.1% and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo by 0.9%.

What the head-to-head numbers imply is that the Quadro GV100 is not just faster; it is faster by a factor of nearly five in OpenCL and more than four in Vulkan. The FirePro S10000's scores, while respectable for its era, place it in a completely different performance conversation. The database shows no benchmark where the FirePro S10000 wins, and the wins tally reflects that: 2 wins for the Quadro GV100, 0 for the FirePro S10000.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Quadro GV100 scores 150004, which is 389.7% higher than the FirePro S10000's 30631.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro S10000 win any benchmark against the Quadro GV100?

A: No. In the two shared tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the FirePro S10000 loses both, with the Quadro GV100 winning 2 out of 2.

Q: How does the Quadro GV100 compare to its closest rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score is 35520, placing it 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, 2.4% ahead of the NVIDIA A2, 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, and 2.1% behind the NVIDIA T1000.

Q: Where does the FirePro S10000 rank among its nearest competitors?

A: Its average score of 32388 is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, 0.5% behind the AMD FirePro S9300 X2, 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 570X, and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each card?

A: The Quadro GV100 sits at the 80th percentile among all GPUs, while the FirePro S10000 is at the 77th percentile.

Q: Which card has the higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro GV100 has a bandwidth of 868.4 GB/s, versus 240.0 GB/s for the FirePro S10000.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages, and the data reflects that. The Quadro GV100 is built on the Volta architecture, using the GV100 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 21,100 million transistors onto an 815 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.9M per mm². The FirePro S10000, on the other hand, uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Tahiti chip, also from TSMC, but on a 28 nm process. It contains 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, with a density of 12.3M per mm².

The transistor count difference is stark: the Quadro GV100 has roughly five times the transistor budget. This translates into a much larger compute core. The Quadro GV100 has 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. It also includes 640 tensor cores, which are specialized for deep learning workloads. The FirePro S10000 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no tensor cores at all. In raw throughput, the Quadro GV100 delivers 16.66 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 33.32 TFLOPS of FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio). The FirePro S10000 manages 3.405 TFLOPS of FP32 and has no FP16 capability listed in the database.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The Quadro GV100 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, while the FirePro S10000 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The bandwidth figures reinforce the gap: 868.4 GB/s versus 240.0 GB/s. The process node difference (12 nm versus 28 nm) explains part of the efficiency and density advantage, but the architectural generation gap is the dominant factor.

The APIs supported also differ. The Quadro GV100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro S10000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards are end-of-life in production status, but the release dates tell the story: the Quadro GV100 launched in March 2018, while the FirePro S10000 launched in November 2012, a gap of over five years.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The Quadro GV100 has a base clock of 1132 MHz and a boost clock of 1627 MHz, while the FirePro S10000 runs at 825 MHz base and 950 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective) for the Quadro GV100 versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the FirePro S10000.

Memory size is 32 GB versus 3 GB. The bus width is 4096 bits versus 384 bits. Pixel rate is 208.3 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 520.6 GTexel/s versus 106.4 GTexel/s. The TDP figures are 250 W for the Quadro GV100 and 375 W for the FirePro S10000, meaning the newer card delivers far more performance while drawing less power. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus 2x 8-pin, and the suggested PSU is 600 W versus 750 W.

Physical dimensions are similar in height (both 111 mm), but the Quadro GV100 is 267 mm long (10.5 inches) while the FirePro S10000 is 305 mm long (12 inches). Both are dual-slot cards with PCIe 3.0 x16 interfaces. Display outputs differ: the Quadro GV100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the FirePro S10000 has 1x DVI and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2.

The launch MSRP for the Quadro GV100 is 8,999 USD, and for the FirePro S10000 it is 3,599 USD. The Quadro GV100's predecessor is Quadro Pascal and its successor is Quadro Turing; the FirePro S10000's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro GCN.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 is the superior card by every measured metric. In Geekbench OpenCL, it is 389.7% ahead; in Geekbench Vulkan, it is 308.6% ahead. It wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head tests. Its average benchmark score of 35520 places it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro S10000's 32388 sits at the 77th percentile. The Quadro GV100 also has a massive advantage in memory capacity, bandwidth, compute throughput, and architectural features like tensor cores.

The FirePro S10000, however, is not without context. Its scores are consistent with its nearest rivals, all within 0.7% of its average. It is a competent card for its generation, but the database shows it is simply outclassed by the Quadro GV100. The verdict for most use cases is clear: the Quadro GV100 is the card to choose when maximum performance is required.

A caveat from the data: the Quadro GV100 has a launch MSRP of 8,999 USD, which is substantially higher than the FirePro S10000's 3,599 USD. If the use case demands the highest possible compute performance, the Quadro GV100 is the only option that makes sense. If the workload is lighter and the older card's capabilities suffice, the FirePro S10000 still functions, but the performance gap is so wide that it is hard to recommend it for any compute-intensive task.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro GV100 wins everywhere that the database measures. In Geekbench OpenCL, its 150004 score is 389.7% higher than the FirePro S10000's 30631. In Geekbench Vulkan, its 139526 is 308.6% higher than 34145. It wins both head-to-head tests, which is the entirety of the shared benchmark set. There is no test in the database where the FirePro S10000 emerges victorious.

For the Quadro GV100, the wins are not narrow. They are overwhelming, driven by its newer architecture, larger memory pool (32 GB versus 3 GB), and higher bandwidth (868.4 GB/s versus 240.0 GB/s). The tensor cores (640 of them) give it a specialized edge for AI and deep learning workloads that the FirePro S10000 cannot match, as the latter has no tensor cores at all.

For the FirePro S10000, its wins are limited to being competitive within its own peer group. It sits 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE and 0.5% behind the AMD FirePro S9300 X2, but 0.7% ahead of both the AMD Radeon Pro 570X and the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME. That means, among older or lower-tier cards, it holds its ground. But against the Quadro GV100, the data offers no scenario where it wins.

The use-case split is therefore not about which card wins; it is about which card is sufficient. For workloads that require massive memory (32 GB HBM2), high FP16 throughput (33.32 TFLOPS), and tensor core acceleration, the Quadro GV100 is the only viable choice. For workloads that run within the FirePro S10000's 3 GB GDDR5 limit and 3.405 TFLOPS of FP32, the older card can still operate, but it will do so at a fraction of the Quadro GV100's speed. The database's recorded measurements leave no room for ambiguity: the Quadro GV100 is the definitive winner in every shared test.