AMD FirePro S7150 vs AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Comparison

The AMD FirePro S7150 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT represent two very different eras of AMD GPU design, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The S7150 is a server-focused compute card from 2016 built on the aging GCN 3.0 architecture, while the RX 6700 XT is a mainstream gaming card from 2021 using the modern RDNA 2.0 architecture. The benchmark data shows a decisive generational gap, with the newer card dominating in every measurable compute workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is stark, with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT winning both available benchmark tests outright. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700 XT scores 44,152 against the FirePro S7150’s 26,543, a margin of 39.9% in favor of the newer card. This is not a marginal improvement; it represents a fundamental leap in compute throughput per clock and per watt of silicon area. The Vulkan results are even more lopsided: the RX 6700 XT posts 93,500 versus the S7150’s 29,690, a 68.2% advantage. The delta is so large that the FirePro S7150 appears to be a generation behind in API efficiency, not just raw compute.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the FirePro S7150’s average benchmark score of 28,117 places it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, with its closest rivals being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28,020, 0.3% faster) and the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (27,973, 0.5% faster). The RX 6700 XT, meanwhile, averages 27,425, sitting in the 72nd percentile, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27,565, 0.5% faster) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435, 0% faster). This is a curious inversion: despite the RX 6700 XT being far faster in the direct head-to-head tests, its average score is slightly lower than the S7150’s. The reason is that the S7150’s average is pulled up by its strong OpenCL and Vulkan results, while the RX 6700 XT’s average is dragged down by its Passmark scores, which include several low DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 results (242 and 124 respectively) that are not representative of its modern workload performance.

The single-test results illuminate the architecture gap. The S7150’s OpenCL score of 26,543 is competitive with the GTX 980 Ti (28,020, 0.3% delta), showing that GCN 3.0 was a solid compute architecture in its day. However, the RX 6700 XT’s OpenCL score of 44,152 is in a different league entirely, and its Vulkan score of 93,500 nearly triples the S7150’s 29,690. The data indicates that the RX 6700 XT excels in modern, low-level API workloads, while the S7150 was designed for a compute environment that prioritized raw FP32 throughput over graphics API versatility.

FAQ

Q: How significant is the performance gap between the two cards in compute workloads?

A: The RX 6700 XT leads by 39.9% in OpenCL and 68.2% in Vulkan, making it the clear victor in all measured head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: Which card has a better average benchmark score?

A: The FirePro S7150 has a slightly higher average score of 28,117 versus the RX 6700 XT’s 27,425, a difference of roughly 2.5%, despite losing both direct comparisons.

Q: What does the percentile ranking tell us about each card?

A: The S7150 sits at the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6700 XT is at the 72nd percentile, indicating they are statistically close in overall standing despite their architectural differences.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 6700 XT has a transistor density of 51.3M / mm², nearly four times the S7150’s 13.7M / mm², reflecting the move from 28 nm to 7 nm process technology.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6700 XT offers 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth compared to the S7150’s 160.0 GB/s, a 140% advantage for the newer card.

Q: Are both cards end-of-life products?

A: Yes, both the FirePro S7150 and the RX 6700 XT are listed as end-of-life, though they were released five years apart (2016 and 2021 respectively).

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on entirely different architectures and process nodes. The FirePro S7150 uses the Tonga chip, based on GCN 3.0, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It integrates 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.7M / mm². The RX 6700 XT uses the Navi 22 chip, based on RDNA 2.0, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It packs 17,200 million transistors onto a smaller 335 mm² die, achieving a density of 51.3M / mm². This is a massive density improvement, allowing the newer card to fit over three times as many transistors into a slightly smaller physical footprint.

The compute resources differ substantially. The S7150 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the RX 6700 XT scales up to 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 6700 XT also introduces 40 ray tracing cores, which are completely absent from the older GCN 3.0 design. Pixel and texture rates reflect the gap: the S7150 produces 29.44 GPixel/s and 117.8 GTexel/s, while the RX 6700 XT achieves 165.2 GPixel/s and 413.0 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is also significantly higher on the newer card at 13.21 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance scaling from 7.537 TFLOPS to 26.43 TFLOPS (both at 2:1 ratio).

Memory configurations also diverge. The S7150 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s bandwidth at 5 Gbps effective. The RX 6700 XT uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s at 16 Gbps effective. The newer card achieves more than double the bandwidth despite a narrower bus, thanks to faster memory technology. API support is another differentiator: the S7150 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 6700 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, adding ray tracing and mesh shader capabilities. The S7150 has no display outputs, marking it as a server compute card, while the RX 6700 XT includes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the far more capable GPU for any modern workload. In the two head-to-head benchmarks, it wins both with a 39.9% margin in OpenCL and a 68.2% margin in Vulkan. The architecture leap from GCN 3.0 to RDNA 2.0, combined with the process shrink from 28 nm to 7 nm, delivers over three times the FP32 compute (13.21 TFLOPS vs 3.768 TFLOPS) and more than double the memory bandwidth (384.0 GB/s vs 160.0 GB/s). The RX 6700 XT also brings ray tracing support, DirectX 12 Ultimate, and a full suite of display outputs, none of which the S7150 offers.

However, the FirePro S7150 is not without a niche. Its average benchmark score of 28,117 edges out the RX 6700 XT’s 27,425, and it ranks slightly higher in percentile (73rd vs 72nd). This is likely due to its specialized compute focus: the S7150 was designed for server workloads with no display output, and its GCN architecture was tuned for FP32 compute tasks. The single-slot form factor and 150 W TDP also make it a lower-power option for dense server deployments. But for any user needing graphics output, gaming performance, or modern API support, the RX 6700 XT is the only choice. The S7150 is a legacy compute card that has been superseded by newer Radeon Pro GCN products, while the RX 6700 XT’s successor is Navi III.

Pick the RX 6700 XT if you need a versatile GPU for gaming, content creation, or any task involving Vulkan or DirectX 12 Ultimate. Pick the FirePro S7150 only if you are maintaining a legacy server infrastructure that requires a single-slot, low-power compute card with no display outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro S7150 | AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 5,000 million | 17,200 million |

| Die Size | 366 mm² | 335 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.7M / mm² | 51.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | — | 2321 MHz |

| Boost Clock | — | 2581 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 128 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| RT Cores | — | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 29.44 GPixel/s | 165.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 117.8 GTexel/s | 413.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.768 TFLOPS | 13.21 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.537 TFLOPS (2:1) | 26.43 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 230 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2016-01-31 | 2021-03-02 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,399 USD | 479 USD |