AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs AMD Radeon RX 480 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 480 and AMD FirePro S9300 X2 represent two very different philosophies from the same company, separated by a generation of architecture and aimed at opposite ends of the market. The RX 480 is a mainstream gaming card built for the consumer desktop, while the FirePro S9300 X2 is a dual-GPU server compute monster with no display outputs at all. Benchmark data shows the RX 480 holds a clear edge in the tests available, despite the FirePro’s vastly higher raw compute specifications. The average benchmark score for the RX 480 is 33,997, placing it in the 78th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro S9300 X2 sits at 32,540 in the 77th percentile. These are close overall averages, but the head-to-head results tell a more decisive story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share only two benchmark results in the data, and the RX 480 wins both outright. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 480 scores 37,998 against the FirePro S9300 X2’s 27,971, a delta of 35.8% in favor of the consumer card. That is a substantial margin, especially considering the FirePro’s theoretical FP32 throughput of 7.987 TFLOPS versus the RX 480’s 5.834 TFLOPS. The Geekbench Vulkan result is similarly one-sided: the RX 480 posts 45,968 to the FirePro’s 37,109, a 23.9% advantage. The RX 480 wins both head-to-head tests, giving it a 2–0 record in this comparison.

Interpreting these numbers requires context. The FirePro S9300 X2 is built on GCN 3.0 with a 28 nm process, while the RX 480 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm node. The newer architecture likely explains part of the gap, as does driver maturity for consumer workloads. The FirePro’s HBM memory runs at a modest 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective) across a 4096-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth — double the RX 480’s 256.0 GB/s. Yet that bandwidth advantage does not translate into benchmark wins. The RX 480’s 8 GB of GDDR5 at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) appears better suited to the actual tasks in these tests.

A closer look at the nearest rivals for each card puts the scores in perspective. The RX 480’s average of 33,997 is within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (34,133) and 0.5% of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154). It is also 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (33,951) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7700S (33,849). The FirePro S9300 X2’s 32,540 sits 0.2% below the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (32,601) and 0.3% above the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32,456). It is also 0.5% above the AMD FirePro S10000 (32,388) and 0.9% below the NVIDIA T600 Mobile (32,849). These deltas are all tiny, meaning both cards are clustered with their respective peer groups, but the RX 480’s peer group scores slightly higher on average.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro S9300 X2 wins on pure hardware specifications, but not on the benchmark results available. It has 4,096 shading units against the RX 480’s 2,304, 256 texture mapping units versus 144, and 64 ROPs versus 32. Its pixel rate is 62.40 GPixel/s and texture rate is 249.6 GTexel/s, compared to 40.51 GPixel/s and 182.3 GTexel/s for the RX 480. The FirePro also leads in FP32 compute at 7.987 TFLOPS versus 5.834 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s is exactly double. For workloads that scale with raw shader count and memory bandwidth, such as certain compute or rendering tasks, the FirePro’s hardware profile is theoretically superior.

However, the data shows no benchmark where the FirePro actually wins. The RX 480 takes both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests, suggesting that its GCN 4.0 architecture and higher effective memory clock (8 Gbps versus 1000 Mbps) deliver better real-world performance in these specific workloads. The RX 480 also has a 78th percentile ranking versus the FirePro’s 77th, a marginal but consistent edge. The FirePro’s advantage would likely appear in server-side compute tasks that do not rely on display output, but the available benchmarks do not capture that. The RX 480, by contrast, is a dual-purpose card that can handle both gaming and compute, with display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the FirePro has no outputs at all.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 has an average benchmark score of 33,997, which is higher than the AMD FirePro S9300 X2’s 32,540. The RX 480 also holds a 78th percentile ranking versus the FirePro’s 77th.

Q: How large is the RX 480’s lead in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 480 scores 37,998 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 35.8% higher than the FirePro S9300 X2’s 27,971. This is the largest margin in any shared benchmark.

Q: Does the FirePro S9300 X2 win any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head data, the FirePro S9300 X2 loses both available tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. It has zero wins against the RX 480.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 480 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro has double the bandwidth but half the capacity.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 has 4,096 shading units, nearly double the RX 480’s 2,304. Despite this, the RX 480 wins the available benchmarks.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The RX 480 was released on 2016-06-28, and the FirePro S9300 X2 was released on 2016-03-30.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply on nearly every specification except bus interface and API support. The RX 480 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the FirePro S9300 X2 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. Transistor counts differ significantly: the RX 480 has 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, giving a density of 24.6M / mm². The FirePro has 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die, with a lower density of 14.9M / mm². The FirePro’s die is more than twice the size, but the RX 480’s smaller node packs transistors more tightly.

Memory is another major difference. The RX 480 has 8 GB of GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro has 4 GB of HBM with a 4096-bit bus and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds are listed only for the RX 480 (base 1120 MHz, boost 1266 MHz, memory 2000 MHz / 8 Gbps effective), while the FirePro lists only memory at 500 MHz / 1000 Mbps effective. The FirePro’s TDP is 300 W with 2x 8-pin connectors and a suggested 700 W PSU, versus the RX 480’s 150 W with 1x 6-pin and a 450 W PSU.

Physical dimensions also differ. The RX 480 is 240 mm (9.4 inches) long, 95 mm (3.7 inches) high, and 35 mm (1.4 inches) wide. The FirePro is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) high, with no width listed. Both are dual-slot cards. The RX 480 has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the FirePro has no outputs. Both support PCIe 3.0 x16, DirectX 12 (12_0), and OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan support differs: the RX 480 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro supports 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The RX 480 is built on GCN 4.0 with the Ellesmere chip, part of the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses GCN 3.0 with the Capsaicin chip, from the FirePro Server (Sx300) generation. This is a full architectural generation apart, which explains some performance differences despite the FirePro’s higher raw specs. The RX 480’s 14 nm process allows higher clocks and better efficiency, while the FirePro’s 28 nm process requires a much larger die (596 mm² versus 232 mm²) to house its dual-GPU design.

Shading unit counts favor the FirePro heavily: 4,096 versus 2,304. Texture mapping units are 256 versus 144, and ROPs are 64 versus 32. The FirePro’s FP32 throughput of 7.987 TFLOPS is 37% higher than the RX 480’s 5.834 TFLOPS. The RX 480 lists FP16 at 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro has no FP16 data. The FirePro’s HBM memory uses a 4096-bit bus, which is 16 times wider than the RX 480’s 256-bit bus, but the RX 480’s GDDR5 runs at a much higher effective speed (8 Gbps versus 1000 Mbps).

The architectures also differ in their intended use. The RX 480 is a consumer card with display outputs and a successor to Pirate Islands, followed by Polaris. The FirePro S9300 X2 is a server compute card with no display outputs, succeeding FirePro Terascale and followed by Radeon Pro GCN. The RX 480 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro is limited to 1.2.170. The FirePro’s dual-GPU design on a single board (Capsaicin chip) explains its high TDP and power connector requirements, but the benchmarks show that this complexity does not translate into wins against the newer, simpler RX 480.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: pick the AMD Radeon RX 480 if you need performance in the available benchmarks. It wins both Geekbench OpenCL (37,998 vs 27,971, +35.8%) and Geekbench Vulkan (45,968 vs 37,109, +23.9%). Its average score of 33,997 is higher, its percentile ranking is better (78th vs 77th), and it has a 2–0 head-to-head record. The RX 480 also offers 8 GB of memory, display outputs, a lower 150 W TDP, and a smaller physical footprint, making it the practical choice for any system that needs video output or fits in a standard desktop case.

Pick the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 only if your workload specifically demands its unique hardware profile. It has 4,096 shading units, 512.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 compute — all significantly higher than the RX 480. It is a server card with no display outputs, a 300 W TDP, and 2x 8-pin power connectors, so it requires a 700 W PSU and a chassis that can handle a 267 mm dual-slot card. Its launch MSRP was 5,999 USD, which is far above the RX 480’s 229 USD, but the benchmark data shows no performance advantage in the tests recorded. For compute tasks that do not appear in these benchmarks, the FirePro’s raw specs might matter, but the available evidence points to the RX 480 as the stronger performer.