AMD FirePro S7150 vs AMD Radeon RX 480 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 480 and AMD FirePro S7150 represent two different branches of AMD’s GPU lineup, one aimed at mainstream desktop graphics and the other at server-side compute. The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in the RX 480, which leads in both shared benchmark tests by substantial margins, while the S7150 retains a niche for compute workloads that favor its FP16 throughput and single-slot server form factor.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 480 wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 480 scores 37,998 against the S7150’s 26,543, a 43.2% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 480 scores 45,968 versus 29,690, a 54.8% lead. The wins tally is 2 for the RX 480 and 0 for the S7150. There are no recorded benchmark tests where the FirePro S7150 outperforms the RX 480.

The RX 480’s wins extend to the overall average benchmark score. It records an average benchmark score of 33,997, while the S7150 averages 28,117. The RX 480 also sits at the 78th percentile among all GPUs in the database, compared to the 73rd percentile for the S7150. This places the RX 480 slightly higher in the overall performance distribution.

The S7150’s strengths are not in these synthetic workloads but in its design purpose. The FirePro S7150 is part of the FirePro Server generation, with no display outputs, a single-slot width, and a 150 W TDP. This makes it a candidate for dense server installations where space and power are constrained. Its FP16 rate of 7.537 TFLOPS (2:1) is notably higher than its FP32 rate of 3.768 TFLOPS, which suggests a design leaning toward compute tasks that can exploit half-precision arithmetic. The RX 480, by contrast, delivers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 5.834 TFLOPS, so it does not offer the same FP16 acceleration advantage.

The RX 480 wins on architectural efficiency and raw throughput in the tested workloads. The S7150 wins on form factor and server-specific traits, such as the absence of display outputs and its single-slot physical profile, which are not reflected in the benchmark scores but matter in certain deployment scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different GCN generations. The RX 480 uses the Ellesmere chip based on GCN 4.0, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The S7150 uses the Tonga chip based on GCN 3.0, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process difference is significant: the RX 480 packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The S7150 contains 5,000 million transistors on a much larger 366 mm² die, giving a density of 13.7 million per square millimeter. The RX 480 achieves higher density on a smaller and newer process node.

The RX 480 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The S7150 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 480 therefore has 256 more shading units and 16 more TMUs, while ROP counts match at 32. The RX 480 also has higher clock rates: base clock 1120 MHz and boost clock 1266 MHz, whereas the S7150 has no base or boost clock listed in the database. The memory clocks differ as well: the RX 480 runs at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective, while the S7150 runs at 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective.

Both cards use 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus. The RX 480 achieves 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the S7150 achieves 160.0 GB/s. This 96.0 GB/s difference comes from the higher memory clock on the RX 480, since the bus width is identical.

The RX 480 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The S7150 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards lack dedicated ray tracing cores and tensor cores, so neither offers dedicated ray-traced acceleration features. The RX 480 has display outputs consisting of 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.0, while the S7150 has no display outputs at all. The S7150 also has a single-slot width and a 241 mm length, 111 mm height, while the RX 480 measures 240 mm long, 95 mm tall, and 35 mm wide.

The RX 480 lists a launch MSRP of 229 USD. The S7150 lists a launch MSRP of 2,399 USD. The RX 480 is 2,170 USD less at launch, but pricing details are not discussed further here.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 performance?

A: The RX 480 delivers 5.834 TFLOPS of FP32, while the S7150 delivers 3.768 TFLOPS. The RX 480 also has a higher texture rate of 182.3 GTexel/s versus 117.8 GTexel/s for the S7150, and a higher pixel rate of 40.51 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s.

Q: Does the FirePro S7150 have any advantage in half-precision compute?

A: Yes. The S7150 reaches 7.537 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32. The RX 480 reaches 5.834 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The S7150’s FP16 throughput exceeds its FP32 throughput, whereas the RX 480’s FP16 matches its FP32.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan workloads in the recorded data?

A: The RX 480 scores 45,968 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 54.8% higher than the S7150’s 29,690. The RX 480 also supports Vulkan 1.3, while the S7150 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

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

A: The RX 480 provides 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth with 8 Gbps effective memory speed. The S7150 provides 160.0 GB/s with 5 Gbps effective. Both use 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a smaller physical footprint?

A: The S7150 is single-slot and has no display outputs, making it suitable for server installations. The RX 480 is dual-slot and has display outputs. In terms of length, the S7150 is 241 mm and the RX 480 is 240 mm, a 1 mm difference.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The RX 480 averages 33,997, while the S7150 averages 28,117. The RX 480 sits at the 78th percentile among all GPUs, and the S7150 sits at the 73rd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The RX 480 uses the Ellesmere chip on GCN 4.0, while the S7150 uses Tonga on GCN 3.0. The process node is 14 nm for the RX 480 and 28 nm for the S7150. The foundry is GlobalFoundries for the RX 480 and TSMC for the S7150. Transistor count is 5,700 million for the RX 480 versus 5,000 million for the S7150. Die size is 232 mm² for the RX 480 versus 366 mm² for the S7150. Transistor density is 24.6 million per mm² versus 13.7 million per mm².

The RX 480 has a base clock of 1120 MHz and a boost clock of 1266 MHz. The S7150 has no base or boost clock listed. Memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective for the RX 480, and 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective for the S7150. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s. Shading units are 2,304 versus 2,048. TMUs are 144 versus 128. ROPs are 32 for both. Pixel rate is 40.51 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 182.3 GTexel/s versus 117.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 5.834 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS. FP16 is 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 7.537 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP is 150 W for both cards. The RX 480 is dual-slot, while the S7150 is single-slot. Both use a single 6-pin power connector and list a suggested PSU of 450 W. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16. The RX 480 has display outputs, while the S7150 has none. The RX 480 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the S7150 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 480 measures 240 mm long, 95 mm tall, and 35 mm wide. The S7150 measures 241 mm long and 111 mm tall, with no width listed. The RX 480 was released on 2016-06-28, while the S7150 was released on 2016-01-31. The RX 480’s predecessor is Pirate Islands and its successor is Polaris. The S7150’s predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro GCN. The RX 480 lists a launch MSRP of 229 USD, while the S7150 lists a launch MSRP of 2,399 USD. The RX 480 is end-of-life, and the S7150 is also end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two head-to-head benchmark results between these cards. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 480 scores 37,998 and the S7150 scores 26,543. This gives the RX 480 a 43.2% advantage. The second is Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 480 scores 45,968 and the S7150 scores 29,690. This gives the RX 480 a 54.8% advantage. The RX 480 wins both tests, and the wins tally is 2 to 0.

The Vulkan gap is larger than the OpenCL gap. The RX 480’s Vulkan score of 45,968 is also higher than its own OpenCL score of 37,998, indicating strong Vulkan performance on the GCN 4.0 architecture. The S7150 shows the opposite pattern within its own results: its Vulkan score of 29,690 exceeds its OpenCL score of 26,543, but the absolute scores remain far lower than the RX 480 in both cases.

The average benchmark score comparison reinforces the head-to-head results. The RX 480 averages 33,997, while the S7150 averages 28,117. The RX 480’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon HD 7950 with an average score of 0.1% higher, the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT with a 0.4% lower score, the AMD Radeon RX 7700S with a 0.4% higher score, and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB with a 0.5% lower score. The S7150’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti with a 0.3% higher score, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X with a 0.5% higher score, the AMD Radeon RX 7800M with a 0.8% higher score, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 with a 1% higher score. These rival deltas show that the RX 480 sits in a tightly clustered performance band near its peers, while the S7150 sits in a similarly tight band but at a lower absolute level.

The RX 480 also has a higher percentile ranking at 78 compared to the S7150’s 73. This means the RX 480 outperforms a larger share of the GPUs tracked in the database. The S7150’s FP16 advantage does not translate into better scores on the recorded Geekbench tests, which likely reflect general compute and graphics workloads rather than half-precision-specific tasks.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 480 is the stronger card in the recorded benchmark data. It wins both head-to-head tests by 43.2% and 54.8%, holds a higher average benchmark score of 33,997 versus 28,117, and ranks at the 78th percentile versus the S7150’s 73rd. The RX 480 also offers higher FP32 performance, higher texture and pixel rates, more memory bandwidth, and a more advanced process node with higher transistor density. For any workload represented by the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests, the RX 480 is the clear choice.

The AMD FirePro S7150 should be selected only for specific server use cases where its single-slot width, lack of display outputs, and FP16 throughput of 7.537 TFLOPS are relevant. Its FP16 rate is higher than the RX 480’s 5.834 TFLOPS, and the 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio indicates a compute-oriented design. However, the S7150 loses the recorded benchmarks by wide margins, and its overall average score is lower. The data shows no scenario in the tested workloads where the S7150 outperforms the RX 480.

For a desktop GPU with display output and strong general compute performance, the RX 480 is the recommended part. For a server card that fits in a single slot and prioritizes FP16 compute, the S7150 has a place, but the benchmark evidence places it behind the RX 480 in the tasks measured here. The S7150’s lower memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s, lower shading unit count, and older 28 nm process further limit its competitiveness against the RX 480 in the database’s recorded metrics.