GPU Comparison

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 and AMD FirePro S10000 are two end-of-life server cards that sit at the same 76th percentile of all GPUs, with average benchmark scores of 32,540 and 32,388 respectively, a 0.5% difference in favor of the S9300 X2. Their architectural profiles and benchmark results, however, diverge sharply: the S9300 X2 uses a newer GCN 3.0 design with HBM memory and far higher compute throughput, while the S10000 uses GCN 1.0 with GDDR5 and a higher OpenCL score. These differences translate into distinct use-case strengths, which the following sections break down.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear split. In Geekbench OpenCL, the S10000 scores 30,631, which is 8.7% higher than the S9300 X2’s 27,971. In Geekbench Vulkan, the S9300 X2 scores 37,109, 8.7% higher than the S10000’s 34,145. Thus, the S10000 is the stronger OpenCL performer, while the S9300 X2 dominates Vulkan workloads. The S9300 X2 also has no display outputs, making it a pure compute accelerator, whereas the S10000 includes 1x DVI and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, allowing it to drive displays. For compute-heavy tasks that rely on Vulkan, the S9300 X2’s higher FP32 throughput (7.987 TFLOPS vs 3.405 TFLOPS) and larger memory bandwidth (512 GB/s vs 240 GB/s) likely explain its Vulkan advantage. Conversely, the S10000’s OpenCL lead suggests that its older architecture or specific driver optimizations give it an edge in that API, despite its lower raw compute specifications.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different silicon. The S9300 X2 uses the Capsaicin chip on GCN 3.0, while the S10000 uses the Tahiti chip on GCN 1.0. The S9300 X2 packs 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die, versus 4,313 million on 352 mm² for the S10000, resulting in a transistor density of 14.9M/mm² compared to 12.3M/mm². Memory architecture differs completely: the S9300 X2 has 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus with 512 GB/s bandwidth, while the S10000 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 240 GB/s bandwidth. The S9300 X2 also has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, versus 1792, 112, and 32 on the S10000. Consequently, its pixel rate is 62.40 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 249.6 GTexel/s versus 106.4 GTexel/s. The S10000 has explicit base and boost clocks of 825 MHz and 950 MHz, while the S9300 X2 does not list base or boost clocks; its memory runs at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective) versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the S10000. The S9300 X2 has a lower TDP of 300 W compared to 375 W, and a suggested PSU of 700 W versus 750 W. Both are dual-slot cards with 2x 8-pin power connectors, but the S9300 X2 is 267 mm long while the S10000 is 305 mm long. The S9300 X2 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the S10000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1); both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The S9300 X2 has 7.987 TFLOPS, more than double the S10000’s 3.405 TFLOPS.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The S9300 X2 has 512 GB/s over a 4096-bit HBM bus, versus 240 GB/s over a 384-bit GDDR5 bus for the S10000.

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL?

A: The S10000 scores 30,631 in Geekbench OpenCL, 8.7% higher than the S9300 X2’s 27,971.

Q: Which card wins in Vulkan?

A: The S9300 X2 scores 37,109 in Geekbench Vulkan, 8.7% higher than the S10000’s 34,145.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The S9300 X2 has an average of 32,540, while the S10000 has 32,388, a 0.5% difference (based on the nearestRivals deltaPct).

Q: Which card is newer?

A: The S9300 X2 was released on 2016-03-30, while the S10000 was released on 2012-11-11.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD FirePro S9300 X2 | AMD FirePro S10000 |

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

| Chip | Capsaicin | Tahiti |

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Transistors | 8,900 million | 4,313 million |

| Die size | 596 mm² | 352 mm² |

| Transistor density | 14.9M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base clock |, | 825 MHz |

| Boost clock |, | 950 MHz |

| Memory clock | 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory type | HBM | GDDR5 |

| Bus width | 4096 bit | 384 bit |

| Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 240.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 4096 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 256 | 112 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel rate | 62.40 GPixel/s | 30.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 249.6 GTexel/s | 106.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.987 TFLOPS | 3.405 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 300 W | 375 W |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 750 W |

| Display outputs | No outputs | 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 305 mm (12 inches) |

| Release date | 2016-03-30 | 2012-11-11 |

| Launch MSRP | 5,999 USD | 3,599 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmarks in the data set show a perfect split. In Geekbench OpenCL, the S10000 scores 30,631 against the S9300 X2’s 27,971, a delta of -8.7% (the negative sign indicates the S9300 X2 is lower). In Geekbench Vulkan, the S9300 X2 scores 37,109 against the S10000’s 34,145, a delta of +8.7%. The average scores are 32,540 for the S9300 X2 and 32,388 for the S10000, placing them within 0.5% of each other. Both cards sit at the 76th percentile of all GPUs. Their nearest rivals reinforce this closeness: the S9300 X2 is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (average 32,619) and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA P104-100 (average 32,747), while the S10000 is 0.7% behind the RX 7800 XT and 1.1% behind the P104-100. The S9300 X2’s Vulkan win is exactly mirrored by the S10000’s OpenCL win, suggesting that the choice between these two cards hinges on the API and workload type rather than on overall performance. The S9300 X2’s higher FP32 and memory bandwidth make it the more capable compute card in raw terms, but the S10000’s OpenCL score demonstrates that architectural maturity and driver support can offset those specifications in specific scenarios.