AMD FirePro S7150 vs AMD Radeon RX 590 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro S7150 leads with an average benchmark score of 28,117, while the AMD Radeon RX 590 scores 24,744. The FirePro S7150 performs about 13.6% higher in average scoring based on these figures.

Q: How does each card rank against all other GPUs?

A: The FirePro S7150 sits in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, placing it above the RX 590, which is in the 70th percentile. The FirePro S7150's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, which is only 0.3% behind, while the RX 590's closest competitor is the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, within 0.1%.

Q: What are the architecture and process node differences?

A: The FirePro S7150 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC, with the Tonga chip. The RX 590 uses GCN 4.0 on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with the Polaris 30 chip. The RX 590's process node is smaller, allowing for higher transistor density.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Both cards feature 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus. However, the RX 590 has faster memory: 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) compared to the FirePro S7150's 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). This results in a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s for the RX 590 versus 160.0 GB/s for the FirePro S7150.

Q: Which card supports newer API versions?

A: The RX 590 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro S7150 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 590 also has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the FirePro S7150 has no display outputs.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of each card?

A: The AMD FirePro S7150 had a launch MSRP of 2,399 USD. The AMD Radeon RX 590 had a launch MSRP of 279 USD.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FirePro S7150 and the AMD Radeon RX 590 represent two distinct generations of AMD GPU design, separated by a significant architectural shift.

The FirePro S7150 is built on the GCN 3.0 architecture using the Tonga chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,000 million transistors into a die size of 366 mm², yielding a transistor density of 13.7M per mm². This is a server-oriented design from the FirePro Server (Sx100) generation.

In contrast, the RX 590 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Polaris 30 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 5,700 million transistors on a much smaller die of 232 mm², achieving a transistor density of 24.6M per mm². The smaller node and denser packing are clear indicators of a more modern manufacturing approach.

The compute resources differ notably. The FirePro S7150 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 590 scales this up with 2,304 shading units and 144 TMUs, while keeping the same 32 ROPs. The RX 590's higher shading unit count contributes directly to its performance advantage in raw compute tasks.

Clock speeds tell another story. The FirePro S7150 has no listed base or boost clock in the database, only a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The RX 590, however, has a base clock of 1469 MHz and a boost clock of 1545 MHz, with memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The RX 590's higher memory clock translates to 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 160.0 GB/s for the FirePro S7150.

FP16 capability also diverges. The FirePro S7150 delivers 7.537 TFLOPS FP16 using a 2:1 ratio relative to its FP32 output of 3.768 TFLOPS. The RX 590 provides 7.119 TFLOPS for both FP16 and FP32, indicating a 1:1 ratio, which means it does not offer a dedicated FP16 acceleration path.

The physical and power profiles differ as well. The FirePro S7150 is a single-slot card with a 150 W TDP and a 1x 6-pin power connector. The RX 590 is dual-slot, rated at 175 W TDP, and requires a 1x 8-pin connector. Both share the same 241 mm length, PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark data between these two cards is not recorded in the database, meaning there are no shared test results where both cards ran the same workload. However, the individual benchmark suites and average scores provide a clear picture of relative performance.

The FirePro S7150's recorded benchmarks include Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 26,543 and Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 29,690. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 28,117. The RX 590's recorded benchmarks include 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 1,081 and Geekbench Metal with a score of 48,407. Its average benchmark score is 24,744.

The average score difference is substantial. The FirePro S7150 leads by 3,373 points, which is approximately 13.6% higher than the RX 590's average. This places the FirePro S7150 in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 590 sits in the 70th percentile.

Looking at nearest rivals provides context. The FirePro S7150's average score of 28,117 is only 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28,020) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (27,973). The RX 590's average of 24,744 is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24,763), but 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24,442) and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24,277).

The RX 590's Geekbench Metal score of 48,407 is notable, suggesting strong performance in Apple's Metal API environment. The FirePro S7150's Vulkan score of 29,690 indicates robust Vulkan compute performance, which is relevant for server workloads.

Pixel and texture rates also favor the RX 590. The RX 590 achieves 49.44 GPixel/s and 222.5 GTexel/s, while the FirePro S7150 delivers 29.44 GPixel/s and 117.8 GTexel/s. The RX 590 is roughly 68% faster in pixel throughput and 89% faster in texture throughput, reflecting its higher clock speeds and additional TMUs.

FP32 compute is another area where the RX 590 leads: 7.119 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS for the FirePro S7150. This is nearly double the raw compute throughput. However, the FirePro S7150's FP16 output of 7.537 TFLOPS exceeds the RX 590's FP16 of 7.119 TFLOPS, giving the FirePro an edge in workloads that can utilize FP16 with a 2:1 ratio.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD FirePro S7150 and the AMD Radeon RX 590:

• Chip: Tonga (FirePro S7150) versus Polaris 30 (RX 590)
• Architecture: GCN 3.0 versus GCN 4.0
• Generation: FirePro Server (Sx100) versus Polaris (RX 500)
• Process Node: 28 nm (TSMC) versus 12 nm (GlobalFoundries)
• Transistors: 5,000 million versus 5,700 million
• Die Size: 366 mm² versus 232 mm²
• Transistor Density: 13.7M / mm² versus 24.6M / mm²
• Base Clock: Not listed versus 1469 MHz
• Boost Clock: Not listed versus 1545 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective)
• Memory Bandwidth: 160.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 2048 versus 2304
• TMUs: 128 versus 144
• Pixel Rate: 29.44 GPixel/s versus 49.44 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 117.8 GTexel/s versus 222.5 GTexel/s
• FP32: 3.768 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS
• FP16: 7.537 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 7.119 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 150 W versus 175 W
• Slot Width: Single-slot versus Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin versus 1x 8-pin
• Display Outputs: No outputs versus 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Vulkan API: 1.2.170 versus 1.3
• Height: 111 mm (FirePro S7150) versus not listed (RX 590)
• Release Date: 2016-01-31 versus 2018-11-14
• Predecessor: FirePro Terascale versus Arctic Islands
• Successor: Radeon Pro GCN versus Vega
• Launch MSRP: 2,399 USD versus 279 USD

Fields that are identical include memory size (8 GB), memory type (GDDR5), bus width (256 bit), ROPs (32), DirectX support (12_0), OpenGL support (4.6), bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x16), length (241 mm), suggested PSU (450 W), and production status (End-of-life).

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between two very different product categories. The FirePro S7150 is a server-class card from 2016, designed for compute workloads with no display outputs. The RX 590 is a consumer gaming card from 2018, built for rasterization and direct rendering.

In terms of average benchmark score, the FirePro S7150 wins with 28,117 versus 24,744 for the RX 590. This is a 13.6% advantage and a percentile ranking of 73 versus 70. However, this average is driven by compute-oriented tests (OpenCL, Vulkan) rather than gaming workloads.

For raw compute throughput in FP32, the RX 590 is the stronger card at 7.119 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS. For FP16, the FirePro S7150 edges ahead at 7.537 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS. The RX 590 also dominates in pixel rate (49.44 versus 29.44 GPixel/s) and texture rate (222.5 versus 117.8 GTexel/s).

The user should pick the FirePro S7150 if the workload is server-side compute, particularly Vulkan or OpenCL tasks where its average score and FP16 throughput matter. The user should pick the RX 590 if the workload involves direct rendering, display output, or FP32-heavy compute, given its higher clocks, faster memory, and superior pixel/texture throughput.

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro S7150 wins in:

• Average benchmark score: 28,117 versus 24,744 (13.6% higher)
• Percentile ranking: 73rd versus 70th percentile
• FP16 compute: 7.537 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS
• Geekbench Vulkan: 29,690 recorded score
• Power efficiency: 150 W TDP versus 175 W TDP
• Physical footprint: single-slot versus dual-slot
• Server-oriented design: no display outputs, 1x 6-pin connector

AMD Radeon RX 590 wins in:

• FP32 compute: 7.119 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS (near double)
• Pixel rate: 49.44 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 222.5 GTexel/s versus 117.8 GTexel/s
• Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s
• Memory clock: 2000 MHz versus 1250 MHz
• Shading units: 2304 versus 2048
• TMUs: 144 versus 128
• Base and boost clocks: 1469 MHz / 1545 MHz versus not listed
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus none
• Vulkan API version: 1.3 versus 1.2.170
• Smaller die: 232 mm² versus 366 mm²
• Higher transistor density: 24.6M / mm² versus 13.7M / mm²
• Newer release date: 2018-11-14 versus 2016-01-31

The RX 590 is the obvious pick for any workload that requires display output or benefits from higher memory bandwidth and FP32 throughput. The FirePro S7150's strengths lie in aggregate compute benchmarks and FP16 acceleration, making it a viable option for server deployments where power draw and slot width are constrained.