AMD FirePro S7150 vs AMD Radeon R9 M290X Comparison

The AMD FirePro S7150 and AMD Radeon R9 M290X represent two distinct approaches to AMD GPU design during the 28 nm era. The FirePro S7150, released later, targets server and compute workloads, while the R9 M290X is a mobile-focused part from the earlier GCN 1.0 generation. The recorded data shows a clear performance gap, but the reasons behind that gap, and the specific use cases each card serves, require a closer look at the benchmark results and architectural specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD FirePro S7150 scores 26,543, while the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 22,028. This represents a 20.5% advantage for the FirePro S7150. This is a substantial lead, indicating that the FirePro S7150 delivers significantly more compute throughput in OpenCL workloads. The R9 M290X, while still a capable performer, trails by a considerable margin in this specific metric.

The FirePro S7150 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 29,690, which is higher than its OpenCL score. The R9 M290X, on the other hand, has a Geekbench Metal score of 24,524, which is higher than its OpenCL result but still below the FirePro S7150's OpenCL score. While these are different APIs and not directly comparable, the data suggests that the FirePro S7150 maintains a performance advantage across different compute interfaces. The average benchmark score for the FirePro S7150 is 28,117, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs. The R9 M290X has an average score of 23,276, putting it in the 68th percentile.

When looking at the nearest rivals in the database, the FirePro S7150's average score of 28,117 is very close to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, which averages 28,020, a delta of just 0.3%. It also sits slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (27,973, delta 0.5%) and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27,883, delta 0.8%). This indicates that the FirePro S7150 is competitive with a range of high-performance GPUs from both NVIDIA and AMD, even though those parts may be from different generations or market segments.

The R9 M290X, with an average score of 23,276, is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 6600M, which scores 23,273 (delta 0%). It is also essentially tied with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, delta 0.1%) and the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, delta 0.1%). The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 scores slightly higher at 23,315, giving it a delta of -0.2% relative to the R9 M290X. This shows that the R9 M290X, despite being an older mobile part, still performs in line with several more modern GPUs, likely due to its high memory bandwidth and reasonable compute capabilities.

The head-to-head data reveals that the FirePro S7150 is the clear winner in the only direct comparison, with a 20.5% lead in OpenCL. This is a significant margin that will have practical implications for any workload leveraging OpenCL. The FirePro S7150 also has a higher average benchmark score, a higher percentile ranking, and is positioned among more powerful rivals in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro S7150 wins in the compute-focused arena. Its higher OpenCL score and its strong Vulkan score indicate that it is well-suited for general-purpose GPU computing tasks. The 20.5% lead over the R9 M290X in OpenCL is a clear indicator of its superior compute throughput. This makes it the better choice for applications that rely heavily on OpenCL, such as certain scientific simulations, video encoding, and machine learning inference tasks that run on the GPU. The FirePro S7150 also has a higher average benchmark score, which suggests consistent performance across different types of compute workloads.

The AMD Radeon R9 M290X does not have a direct head-to-head win in the database, as the only comparison is the OpenCL test, which it loses. However, it does have a Metal benchmark score of 24,524. This is a metric that the FirePro S7150 does not have, as the FirePro S7150 has no display outputs and is not designed for graphics rendering on a screen. The R9 M290X, being a mobile part with portable device dependent display outputs, is designed to drive a display. Its Metal score indicates that it can handle graphics and compute workloads through Apple's Metal API. For a user in a macOS environment, the R9 M290X would have a functional advantage simply because it can output to a display, whereas the FirePro S7150 cannot.

The use-case split is therefore quite stark. The FirePro S7150 is a compute card for servers, where display output is unnecessary. Its 8 GB of memory and high FP32 throughput make it suitable for large datasets and heavy compute loads. The R9 M290X is a mobile graphics solution for laptops, where it must balance performance with power consumption (100 W TDP) and provide display output. Its strengths are in traditional graphics rendering and compute tasks that fit within a mobile power envelope. The data shows no scenario in the database where the R9 M290X outperforms the FirePro S7150 in a shared benchmark, but its role as a mobile GPU grants it a functional niche that the FirePro S7150 cannot fill.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant. The AMD FirePro S7150 is built on GCN 3.0 architecture and uses the Tonga chip. The AMD Radeon R9 M290X uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Neptune chip. This generational difference is the primary driver of the performance disparity. GCN 3.0 introduced architectural improvements over GCN 1.0, including better compute efficiency and improved resource utilization.

Both GPUs are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the FirePro S7150 packs 5,000 million transistors on a die size of 366 mm², giving it a transistor density of 13.7M per mm². The R9 M290X has 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, with a density of 13.2M per mm². The FirePro S7150 has nearly double the transistor count, which allows for a significantly larger compute core.

The FirePro S7150 features 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation pipelines. In contrast, the R9 M290X has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the FirePro S7150 has 60% more shading units and 60% more TMUs. This directly translates into higher theoretical performance. The FirePro S7150's texture rate is 117.8 GTexel/s, compared to 72.00 GTexel/s for the R9 M290X. Its pixel rate is 29.44 GPixel/s versus 28.80 GPixel/s for the R9 M290X, a smaller but still present advantage.

The FP32 compute performance is a major differentiator. The FirePro S7150 delivers 3.768 TFLOPS, while the R9 M290X delivers 2.304 TFLOPS. The FirePro S7150 also supports FP16 compute at 7.537 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature that the R9 M290X does not list. This makes the FirePro S7150 much more capable for workloads that can use half-precision arithmetic, which is common in certain AI and compute tasks.

Memory configurations also differ. The FirePro S7150 comes with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M290X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 153.6 GB/s. The FirePro S7150 has more capacity and slightly more bandwidth, which aids in handling larger datasets. The memory clock is also higher on the FirePro S7150, at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) for the R9 M290X.

The power characteristics are notably different. The FirePro S7150 has a TDP of 150 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 450 W. It is a single-slot card with no display outputs. The R9 M290X has a lower TDP of 100 W, is an MXM module, and has no dedicated power connectors, as it draws power from the laptop's board. Its display outputs are portable device dependent. The FirePro S7150 also has a base clock that is not listed, while the R9 M290X has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. The FirePro S7150's clock speeds are not recorded in the database, but its higher core count and architectural efficiency compensate.

In terms of API support, both GPUs support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. However, the FirePro S7150 supports DirectX 12 at the 12_0 feature level, while the R9 M290X is listed at 11_1. This means the FirePro S7150 has better support for modern DirectX 12 features. The FirePro S7150 is also a PCIe 3.0 x16 card, as is the R9 M290X. The FirePro S7150 was released in 2016, with the R9 M290X releasing earlier in 2014. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The AMD FirePro S7150 has a significantly higher OpenCL score of 26,543 compared to the AMD Radeon R9 M290X's 22,028, giving it a 20.5% lead in this benchmark.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare between the two?

A: The FirePro S7150's average benchmark score is 28,117, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs. The R9 M290X has an average score of 23,276, which puts it in the 68th percentile.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths of these cards?

A: The FirePro S7150 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s, while the R9 M290X has 4 GB of GDDR5 with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. Both use a 256-bit memory bus.

Q: Does the R9 M290X support any APIs that the FirePro S7150 does not?

A: The R9 M290X has a recorded Geekbench Metal score of 24,524. The FirePro S7150 has no display outputs and no Metal benchmark score in the database. The R9 M290X also supports DirectX 12 at the 11_1 feature level, while the FirePro S7150 supports the higher 12_0 level.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The FirePro S7150 has a TDP of 150 W and requires a 6-pin power connector. The R9 M290X has a TDP of 100 W and is an MXM module with no dedicated power connectors.

Q: How does the R9 M290X compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The R9 M290X's average score of 23,276 is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273, delta 0%) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23,250, delta 0.1%). It is also within 0.1% of the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249).

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous regarding raw compute performance. The AMD FirePro S7150 is the superior GPU in every shared benchmark metric. Its 20.5% lead in OpenCL, combined with its higher average score, higher percentile ranking, and superior architectural specifications, makes it the clear choice for compute-intensive workloads. Anyone running OpenCL-based applications, such as scientific computing, data processing, or certain rendering tasks, should select the FirePro S7150 if the system can accommodate its 150 W TDP, 6-pin power requirement, and lack of display outputs.

The AMD Radeon R9 M290X, while less powerful, serves a different purpose. It is a mobile GPU designed for laptops, as indicated by its MXM form factor and 100 W TDP. It has a functional advantage in that it can output to a display, and it has a recorded Metal benchmark score of 24,524, suggesting it is viable for macOS environments. Its performance is also competitive with several modern GPUs, as its average score is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX 6600M and the NVIDIA P106-100. For a portable system where compute performance is secondary to graphics output and power efficiency, the R9 M290X is a reasonable option.

In a direct head-to-head, the FirePro S7150 wins decisively. The R9 M290X wins only in the sense that it is the only one of the two that can be used in a mobile chassis with display output. The choice between them is not a choice of performance class, but a choice of form factor and workload. The FirePro S7150 is a server compute card; the R9 M290X is a mobile graphics part. The recorded data consistently favors the FirePro S7150 for raw compute, while the R9 M290X's sole advantage lies in its portability and display capabilities. Therefore, for any compute task that does not require a screen, the FirePro S7150 is the definitive pick. For a laptop user needing a functional GPU, the R9 M290X is the only viable option from this pair.