AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Comparison

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has a higher average benchmark score of 32,540, placing it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT averages 27,425, sitting in the 72nd percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The Radeon RX 6700 XT scores 44,152 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 36.6% higher than the FirePro S9300 X2's score of 27,971.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest recorded difference is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 6700 XT scores 93,500 versus the FirePro S9300 X2's 37,109, a 60.3% advantage for the RX 6700 XT.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The RX 6700 XT delivers 165.2 GPixel/s, far exceeding the FirePro S9300 X2's 62.40 GPixel/s. This indicates the RX 6700 XT handles rasterization work more efficiently.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life products. The FirePro S9300 X2 launched on March 30, 2016, while the RX 6700 XT launched on March 2, 2021.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card according to the database?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2's nearest rival by average score is the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME, with a delta of -0.2%. The RX 6700 XT's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, showing a delta of 0.0%.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon RX 6700 XT wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark in the database. It dominates in both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, with deltas of -36.6% and -60.3% respectively. The Vulkan gap is particularly striking: the RX 6700 XT more than doubles the FirePro's score. For any workload leveraging compute APIs such as OpenCL or Vulkan, the RX 6700 XT is the clear choice based on measured data.

The FirePro S9300 X2 does not win any direct comparison, yet its average benchmark score of 32,540 sits above the RX 6700 XT's 27,425. This apparent contradiction stems from different benchmark suites: the FirePro's recorded tests are limited to OpenCL and Vulkan, while the RX 6700 XT includes additional tests like Passmark and 3DMark. The FirePro's narrower test profile yields a higher aggregate, but the direct head-to-head results favor the RX 6700 XT decisively.

For use-case selection, the RX 6700 XT wins on raw compute in modern APIs, and it also offers display outputs, making it suitable for interactive workloads. The FirePro S9300 X2, with no display outputs, targets server-side compute where rendering to a screen is unnecessary. Its higher average score suggests it may still hold value in specific compute contexts, but the recorded head-to-head data does not support choosing it over the RX 6700 XT for OpenCL or Vulkan tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses the Capsaicin chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process. The RX 6700 XT uses the Navi 22 chip based on RDNA 2.0, built on a 7 nm TSMC process. This process shrink is substantial, and the RX 6700 XT achieves a transistor density of 51.3 million per square millimeter versus the FirePro's 14.9 million, even though the FirePro packs 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die, while the RX 6700 XT has 17,200 million on a 335 mm² die.

The FirePro S9300 X2 features 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. It uses 4 GB of HBM memory with a 4096-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700 XT has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It uses 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700 XT also includes 40 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro.

The memory architecture differs fundamentally: HBM on a 4096-bit interface versus GDDR6 on a 192-bit interface. The FirePro's bandwidth is higher at 512.0 GB/s, but the RX 6700 XT's memory clock runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus the FirePro's 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective). The RX 6700 XT supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The RX 6700 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the FirePro only reaches DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support differs too: RX 6700 XT runs Vulkan 1.4, the FirePro runs 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds: The RX 6700 XT has a base clock of 2321 MHz, a game clock of 2424 MHz, and a boost clock of 2581 MHz. The FirePro S9300 X2 lists no base, boost, or game clocks in the database, only memory clock. This makes direct clock comparison impossible, but the RX 6700 XT's high boost clock is notable.

Memory: The RX 6700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 versus the FirePro's 4 GB of HBM. The FirePro has a wider bus (4096-bit versus 192-bit) and higher bandwidth (512.0 GB/s versus 384.0 GB/s). The RX 6700 XT has more capacity, which matters for modern workloads.

Compute rates: The RX 6700 XT achieves 13.21 TFLOPS FP32 and 26.43 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The FirePro delivers 7.987 TFLOPS FP32 with no FP16 listed. The RX 6700 XT's FP32 output is roughly 65% higher. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: RX 6700 XT at 165.2 GPixel/s and 413.0 GTexel/s, versus 62.40 GPixel/s and 249.6 GTexel/s for the FirePro.

Power and physical: The RX 6700 XT has a TDP of 230 W with a suggested PSU of 550 W and uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors. The FirePro has a 300 W TDP, needs a 700 W PSU, and uses 2x 8-pin connectors. Both are dual-slot, but the FirePro has no display outputs, while the RX 6700 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions are similar: both are 267 mm long, with the FirePro at 111 mm height and the RX 6700 XT at 110 mm height and 40 mm width.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons, and the RX 6700 XT wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700 XT scores 44,152 against the FirePro's 27,971. That is a 36.6% lead. This gap reflects the RX 6700 XT's newer architecture and higher FP32 throughput. The FirePro's GCN 3.0 design, despite having more shading units (4,096 versus 2,560), cannot match the per-clock efficiency of RDNA 2.0.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin widens dramatically. The RX 6700 XT scores 93,500, the FirePro scores 37,109. The RX 6700 XT leads by 60.3%. Vulkan workloads benefit from the RX 6700 XT's modern driver support, ray tracing hardware, and higher clocks. The FirePro's Vulkan support is older (1.2.170 versus 1.4), and its lack of dedicated ray tracing cores likely hampers it in certain Vulkan test scenes.

The RX 6700 XT also shows strength in other benchmarks not shared with the FirePro. It records 19,786 in Passmark G3D, 9,336 in Passmark GPU Compute, and 130,896 in Geekbench Metal. The FirePro has no equivalent entries, so cross-comparison is unavailable. The RX 6700 XT's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,435 further demonstrates its modern API capability.

The FirePro's average benchmark score of 32,540 is higher than the RX 6700 XT's 27,425, but this is misleading. The FirePro's score comes from only two tests, both of which the RX 6700 XT wins by large margins. The RX 6700 XT's average is dragged down by including many lower-scoring Passmark tests (e.g., 124 in DirectX 10, 77 in DirectX 12, 242 in DirectX 9). When comparing only shared tests, the RX 6700 XT is clearly superior.

The Verdict

The data points decisively to the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT for any user prioritizing OpenCL or Vulkan performance. It wins both head-to-head tests, with a 36.6% advantage in OpenCL and a 60.3% advantage in Vulkan. Its higher clock speeds, newer RDNA 2.0 architecture, and ray tracing cores give it a structural edge that shows up clearly in measured scores.

The FirePro S9300 X2 retains one statistical advantage: its average benchmark score of 32,540 exceeds the RX 6700 XT's 27,425, and it sits in the 77th percentile versus the RX 6700 XT's 72nd. However, this average stems from a limited test set. The FirePro's nearest rivals include the RX 590 GME (delta -0.2%) and RX 7900 GRE (delta 0.3%), indicating it clusters with mid-range cards. The RX 6700 XT's rivals include the RTX 3090 (delta -0.5%) and RTX 4070 Mobile (delta 0.0%), showing it competes at a higher tier.

For compute-heavy server workloads without display requirements, the FirePro's 512.0 GB/s bandwidth and 4 GB HBM could theoretically benefit certain memory-bound tasks. But the measured OpenCL and Vulkan scores do not support this in practice. The RX 6700 XT's 384.0 GB/s bandwidth, while lower, is paired with far higher compute throughput and more memory capacity (12 GB versus 4 GB).

For interactive use, gaming, or any application needing display outputs, the RX 6700 XT is the only viable option between the two, as the FirePro has no outputs. The RX 6700 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern software. The FirePro's DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170 are older, potentially limiting future driver support.

Choose the RX 6700 XT for current-generation compute, gaming, and workstation tasks. Choose the FirePro S9300 X2 only if a specific workload requires its 4096-bit HBM interface or if the higher average score in the database aligns with a proprietary benchmark suite. Otherwise, the head-to-head results favor the RX 6700 XT without ambiguity.