AMD FirePro S7150 vs AMD Radeon Pro 570 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits the two AMD workstation GPUs cleanly by workload type. The AMD Radeon Pro 570 wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons, but the margin and the context tell a more nuanced story about where each card belongs.

For OpenCL workloads, the Radeon Pro 570 posts a score of 27,702 against the FirePro S7150's 26,543, a 4.4% advantage. This is a modest but consistent lead in compute tasks that rely on general-purpose GPU acceleration. The Radeon Pro 570 also takes the Vulkan crown with 31,974 versus 29,690, a more decisive 7.7% gap. If the workload leans on modern graphics APIs, the Radeon Pro 570 is the clear choice.

The FirePro S7150, despite losing both direct comparisons, holds its own in the broader database context. Its average benchmark score of 28,117 places it at the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 570 sits at the 78th percentile with an average of 33,207. The gap in average scores, roughly 18% overall, stems largely from the Radeon Pro 570's additional Geekbench Metal result (39,945), a test the FirePro S7150 does not have recorded. That Metal score inflates the Radeon's aggregate average, making the per-test head-to-head margins the more reliable comparison.

The FirePro S7150's strengths are not in raw speed but in capacity and configuration. It offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the Radeon Pro 570's 4 GB, and a single-slot server form factor with no display outputs. That makes it a candidate for virtualized or headless compute environments where memory footprint matters more than peak throughput. The Radeon Pro 570, by contrast, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with "Portable Device Dependent" outputs, pointing toward mobile or all-in-one systems.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 570 averages 33,207 across its three recorded tests, while the AMD FirePro S7150 averages 28,117 across two tests. The Radeon Pro 570 sits at the 78th percentile of all GPUs, the FirePro S7150 at the 73rd.

Q: How large is the margin in the Vulkan test?

A: The Radeon Pro 570 scores 31,974 in Geekbench Vulkan, beating the FirePro S7150's 29,690 by 7.7%. This is the larger of the two recorded head-to-head wins.

Q: Does the FirePro S7150 win any benchmark comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Radeon Pro 570 winning both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The FirePro S7150 has zero wins in the direct comparison.

Q: What memory capacity does each card offer?

A: The FirePro S7150 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 570 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus but with higher bandwidth at 217.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The Radeon Pro 570, built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm node, packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die for 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The FirePro S7150, on TSMC's 28 nm node, fits 5,000 million transistors into a 366 mm² die, yielding 13.7 million per square millimeter.

Q: Which card has a higher FP16 throughput?

A: The FirePro S7150 delivers 7.537 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio relative to its FP32 rate. The Radeon Pro 570 only matches its FP32 throughput at 3.960 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests favor the Radeon Pro 570, but the margins reveal different performance profiles. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 570 scores 27,702 against the FirePro S7150's 26,543. The 4.4% delta is meaningful for compute tasks but hardly transformative; both cards sit within striking distance of their nearest rivals. The Radeon Pro 570's nearest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile, averages 33,170, just 0.1% off. Those rivals are not part of the head-to-head, though, so the direct comparison remains the more relevant measure.

The Vulkan test shows a wider gap. The Radeon Pro 570 posts 31,974, while the FirePro S7150 manages 29,690, a 7.7% difference. This suggests the newer GCN 4.0 architecture handles modern low-level graphics APIs more efficiently than the older GCN 3.0 design. The FirePro S7150's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, averages 28,020, just 0.3% behind, indicating the FirePro's Vulkan score is respectable for its generation but not competitive with the Radeon's.

Notably, the Radeon Pro 570 has a third benchmark result, Geekbench Metal at 39,945, which the FirePro S7150 lacks entirely. That score is far above either card's OpenCL or Vulkan performance, suggesting Apple's Metal API extracts significantly more throughput from the Ellesmere chip than generic compute APIs. For macOS-centric workflows, the Radeon Pro 570's Metal capability is a decisive factor, though the absence of a comparable FirePro result prevents a direct metric.

The per-test wins align with the overall trend: the Radeon Pro 570 leads in both recorded tests, and its average score benefits from the extra Metal result. The FirePro S7150's best recorded score, 29,690 in Vulkan, would still trail the Radeon Pro 570's worst recorded score, 27,702 in OpenCL, by a narrow 7.2% margin. Across the full test suite, the Radeon Pro 570 maintains a consistent if not overwhelming lead.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on process node, memory bandwidth, compute units, and form factor. The Radeon Pro 570 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the FirePro S7150 uses TSMC's 28 nm node. That process gap explains much of the transistor density difference: 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter versus 13.7 million, despite the Radeon carrying more total transistors (5,700 million versus 5,000 million) on a much smaller die (232 mm² versus 366 mm²).

Memory bandwidth favors the Radeon Pro 570 at 217.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s, both on 256-bit buses. The Radeon achieves this with 6.8 Gbps effective memory speed versus the FirePro's 5 Gbps. However, the FirePro S7150 doubles the capacity to 8 GB, which matters for large datasets that exceed the Radeon's 4 GB limit.

Compute resources split the difference. The FirePro S7150 has more shading units (2,048 versus 1,792) and more texture mapping units (128 versus 112), but both have 32 ROPs. Despite the FirePro's higher unit counts, the Radeon Pro 570 still produces higher pixel rate (35.36 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s) and texture rate (123.8 GTexel/s versus 117.8 GTexel/s), thanks to its higher clocks. The Radeon's base clock of 1000 MHz and boost of 1105 MHz have no direct counterpart in the FirePro's data, which lists no base or boost clocks.

FP32 throughput slightly favors the Radeon Pro 570 at 3.960 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS. FP16 flips decisively: the FirePro S7150 reaches 7.537 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the Radeon Pro 570 only matches its FP32 at 3.960 TFLOPS. For mixed-precision workloads, the FirePro offers a clear advantage.

Physical configuration differs sharply. The Radeon Pro 570 is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors and no defined slot width, drawing 150 W. The FirePro S7150 is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm by 111 mm, requiring one 6-pin connector and a 450 W suggested power supply, also at 150 W TDP. The FirePro has no display outputs, while the Radeon's are "Portable Device Dependent," indicating a mobile or embedded target. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is generational. The Radeon Pro 570 uses GCN 4.0 on the Ellesmere chip, while the FirePro S7150 uses GCN 3.0 on Tonga. The Radeon's newer architecture, combined with the 14 nm process, delivers higher efficiency per transistor and better memory throughput. The FirePro's older GCN 3.0 design compensates with more raw compute units and a 2:1 FP16 ratio that GCN 4.0 does not replicate.

API support shows the generational gap. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: the Radeon Pro 570 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro S7150 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170. That version difference likely contributes to the Radeon's 7.7% Vulkan win. The FirePro S7150's predecessor is listed as "FirePro Terascale," and its successor as "Radeon Pro GCN," marking a clear transition point in AMD's professional lineup. The Radeon Pro 570 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) generation, released in June 2017, while the FirePro S7150 came from the FirePro Server (Sx100) generation, released in January 2016.

Both cards are end-of-life, but production timelines overlap. The FirePro S7150's server orientation shows in its no-output design and single-slot profile. The Radeon Pro 570's Mac lineage shows in its Metal benchmark result and integrated form factor. Neither card has listed ray tracing or tensor cores, consistent with GCN-era designs.

The transistor counts are close, but the die sizes are not. The Radeon Pro 570's 5,700 million transistors on 232 mm² versus the FirePro's 5,000 million on 366 mm² means the newer process packs nearly twice the density. That density advantage translates into higher clock speeds and bandwidth without increasing TDP, both staying at 150 W.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload and environment. For macOS systems or applications that leverage Metal, the Radeon Pro 570 is the only choice between these two, given its recorded Metal score of 39,945 and the FirePro S7150's absence of any Metal result. The Radeon also wins on raw throughput in OpenCL and Vulkan, with 4.4% and 7.7% leads respectively. Its higher bandwidth (217.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s) and newer architecture make it the better performer in most compute and graphics tasks.

The FirePro S7150 justifies itself in two specific scenarios. First, memory capacity: its 8 GB frame buffer doubles the Radeon's 4 GB, which matters for datasets or render targets that exceed 4 GB. Second, FP16 workloads: at 7.537 TFLOPS, it offers nearly double the Radeon's 3.960 TFLOPS for mixed-precision compute. Its server form factor, with no display outputs and a single-slot design, also suits headless or virtualized deployments where the Radeon's portable-device-dependent outputs would be irrelevant.

The nearest rivals reinforce this positioning. The Radeon Pro 570's closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile, averages 33,170, just 0.1% away, while the FirePro S7150's nearest rival, the GTX 980 Ti, averages 28,020, only 0.3% behind. Neither card dominates its peer group; both sit within 1.1% of their nearest alternatives. The Radeon Pro 570's higher average score (33,207 versus 28,117) and percentile ranking (78 versus 73) make it the better overall performer, but the FirePro S7150's niche advantages in capacity and FP16 throughput are real, measurable differentiators.

A user needing a general-purpose workstation GPU with modern API support should pick the Radeon Pro 570. A user running memory-heavy server workloads or FP16-intensive calculations on a headless system should pick the FirePro S7150. The data does not support a single winner across all scenarios; it supports two winners for two distinct jobs.