AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs AMD Radeon Pro Duo Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database includes a single direct comparison between these two cards, and it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon Pro Duo scores 35,860 points against the AMD FirePro S9300 X2’s 27,971 points. That is a 28.2% advantage for the Pro Duo, a substantial margin that places the two cards in different performance tiers despite their shared silicon heritage.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the Pro Duo’s single OpenCL result lands it in the 80th percentile among all GPUs, while the FirePro S9300 X2 sits at the 77th percentile. The FirePro does have a second data point, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 37,109, which is notably higher than its OpenCL result, but the database has no Vulkan score for the Pro Duo, so a direct cross-API comparison is not possible from the recorded data. What the numbers do show is that the Pro Duo’s OpenCL lead is not a fluke of a single run; the delta is consistent with the architectural differences detailed below.

The nearest rival data reinforces the positioning. The Pro Duo’s closest competitor in the database is the NVIDIA T1000, which scores 36,289, putting the T1000 1.2% ahead. The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 (35,520) is only 1% behind the Pro Duo, and the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (35,435) trails by 1.2%. On the other side, the FirePro S9300 X2’s average score of 32,540 sits within 0.9% of the NVIDIA T600 Mobile (32,849), 0.5% ahead of the AMD FirePro S10000 (32,388), and 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32,456). The FirePro’s average is dragged down by its weaker OpenCL showing, while its Vulkan result would place it far higher if that were the only metric considered.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same fundamental design. They share the "Capsaicin" chip, the GCN 3.0 architecture, a 28 nm process at TSMC, 8,900 million transistors, and a 596 mm² die size. The transistor density is identical at 14.9M per mm². Both use 4 GB of HBM memory on a 4096-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and both memory controllers run at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective). The shading unit count is the same at 4,096, with 256 TMUs and 64 ROPs on each card.

The differences emerge in the details of how those resources are clocked and configured. The Pro Duo achieves a pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 256.0 GTexel/s, while the FirePro S9300 X2 is slightly lower at 62.40 GPixel/s and 249.6 GTexel/s. That translates to a measurable difference in raw compute: the Pro Duo delivers 8.192 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, versus 7.987 TFLOPS on the FirePro. The Pro Duo also lists FP16 at 8.192 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the FirePro’s FP16 capability is not recorded in the database.

The power and physical profiles diverge significantly. The Pro Duo has a 350 W TDP and requires three 8-pin power connectors with a suggested 750 W PSU. The FirePro S9300 X2 is more modest, at 300 W TDP, two 8-pin connectors, and a 700 W suggested PSU. The Pro Duo is also slightly longer at 277 mm (10.9 inches) versus the FirePro’s 267 mm (10.5 inches); both are 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall and dual-slot cards. The most striking difference is in display outputs: the Pro Duo has 1x HDMI 1.4a and 3x DisplayPort 1.2, while the FirePro S9300 X2 has no display outputs at all, marking it as a compute-only server part. Both support PCIe 3.0 x16, DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro Duo wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database, and it does so by a wide margin. Its 28.2% lead in OpenCL suggests that for general compute workloads using that API, the Pro Duo is the stronger card. The higher pixel and texture rates, plus the higher FP32 throughput, point to advantages in graphics-heavy tasks such as rendering, image processing, or any workload that leans on shader execution. The presence of display outputs also means the Pro Duo can serve as a workstation card for interactive use, not just batch compute.

The FirePro S9300 X2, despite losing the OpenCL comparison, has its own strengths. Its Vulkan score of 37,109 is higher than the Pro Duo’s OpenCL score of 35,860, which hints that in Vulkan-specific workloads, the FirePro could be competitive or even superior, though the database lacks a direct Vulkan comparison. The FirePro’s lower power draw (300 W vs. 350 W) and simpler power connector requirement (2x 8-pin vs. 3x 8-pin) make it easier to integrate into dense server environments where power and space are constrained. Its lack of display outputs is not a weakness for its intended role; it is a design choice that frees the card from video output logic entirely.

In terms of percentile placement, the Pro Duo’s 80th percentile is only three points above the FirePro’s 77th, but the raw score gap is meaningful. The FirePro’s nearest rivals are all within a narrow band around its average, suggesting it is a mid-pack performer, while the Pro Duo sits in a slightly higher tier. For users prioritizing raw OpenCL compute, the Pro Duo is the clear winner. For those running Vulkan-heavy workloads or needing a lower-power server accelerator, the FirePro has a legitimate case.

Specification Differences

The two cards share most specifications, but the differences are concentrated in a few key areas. The Pro Duo has a pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s versus the FirePro’s 62.40 GPixel/s. The texture rate is 256.0 GTexel/s on the Pro Duo versus 249.6 GTexel/s on the FirePro. FP32 compute is 8.192 TFLOPS on the Pro Duo versus 7.987 TFLOPS on the FirePro. The Pro Duo lists FP16 at 8.192 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the FirePro has no recorded FP16 value.

Power delivery differs: the Pro Duo has a 350 W TDP, 3x 8-pin connectors, and a 750 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro S9300 X2 has a 300 W TDP, 2x 8-pin connectors, and a 700 W suggested PSU. Physical length is 277 mm (10.9 inches) for the Pro Duo versus 267 mm (10.5 inches) for the FirePro; height is identical at 111 mm (4.4 inches). Display outputs are the biggest functional split: the Pro Duo has 1x HDMI 1.4a and 3x DisplayPort 1.2, while the FirePro has none.

Release dates are close but not identical: the FirePro S9300 X2 launched on 2016-03-30, and the Pro Duo on 2016-04-25. The predecessor and successor entries also differ: the Pro Duo’s predecessor is "FirePro GCN" and its successor is "Radeon Pro Polaris," while the FirePro S9300 X2’s predecessor is "FirePro Terascale" and its successor is "Radeon Pro GCN." The FirePro’s generation is listed as "FirePro Server (Sx300)," while the Pro Duo is simply "Radeon Pro GCN."

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 compute?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Duo, at 8.192 TFLOPS, versus the AMD FirePro S9300 X2’s 7.987 TFLOPS.

Q: How much faster is the Pro Duo in the only shared benchmark?

A: The Pro Duo scores 35,860 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 28.2% ahead of the FirePro’s 27,971.

Q: Can the FirePro S9300 X2 output video to a display?

A: No. The FirePro S9300 X2 has no display outputs, while the Pro Duo has 1x HDMI 1.4a and 3x DisplayPort 1.2.

Q: Do both cards use the same memory configuration?

A: Yes. Both use 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth and a 500 MHz memory clock.

Q: Which card requires more power connectors?

A: The Pro Duo requires 3x 8-pin connectors and a 750 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro S9300 X2 needs 2x 8-pin and a 700 W suggested PSU.

Q: Is the FirePro S9300 X2 better in any benchmark?

A: The FirePro has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 37,109, which exceeds the Pro Duo’s OpenCL score, but the database has no Vulkan result for the Pro Duo, so no direct comparison is possible.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most use cases: the AMD Radeon Pro Duo is the stronger card. Its 28.2% OpenCL lead over the FirePro S9300 X2 is decisive, and its higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput confirm that the Pro Duo extracts more performance from the same underlying chip. The Pro Duo’s 80th percentile ranking versus the FirePro’s 77th reinforces this, as does its position among nearest rivals: the Pro Duo trades blows with NVIDIA’s Quadro GV100 and GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, while the FirePro sits in a lower band alongside the RX 590 GME and T600 Mobile.

The FirePro S9300 X2 is not without merit. Its Vulkan score of 37,109 suggests that in Vulkan-specific workloads, it may outperform its OpenCL numbers, and its lower 300 W TDP with fewer power connectors makes it a better fit for dense server deployments. The lack of display outputs is a non-issue for its intended compute-only role. However, the database only records one direct comparison, and the FirePro loses that comparison by a wide margin.

For a workstation user who needs display output and maximum OpenCL compute, the Pro Duo is the only choice. For a server operator running Vulkan workloads and prioritizing power efficiency, the FirePro S9300 X2 has a rationale, but it is a niche one. The benchmark evidence favors the Pro Duo overwhelmingly; the FirePro’s case rests on factors outside the recorded measurements.