AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for this comparison is limited to two shared benchmark tests, both of which are decisively won by the AMD Radeon RX 6800M. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6800M scores 87,621 points against the FirePro S9300 X2's 27,971 points. This represents a delta of -68.1% from the perspective of the FirePro, meaning the RX 6800M outperforms it by a substantial margin. The gap is not merely a few percentage points; the mobile Radeon delivers more than three times the compute throughput in this particular workload.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, tells a similar story. The RX 6800M achieves a score of 94,766, while the FirePro S9300 X2 manages 37,109. The delta here is -60.8%, again favoring the RX 6800M. While the margin is slightly smaller in relative terms than the OpenCL result, it still represents a commanding lead for the newer architecture. The FirePro's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting some relative strength in that API, but it is still far behind the RX 6800M's Vulkan output.

It is importantly the FirePro S9300 X2 has a higher overall benchmark average when compared to the RX 6800M's nearest rivals. The FirePro's average benchmark score is 32,540, placing it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 6800M, despite its wins here, has a lower average score of 28,874 and sits in the 74th percentile. This discrepancy arises because the two cards have been tested in different benchmark suites. The FirePro only has two recorded benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the RX 6800M has eleven, including 3DMark, PassMark, and Metal tests. The RX 6800M's average is dragged down by low scores in older DirectX 9, 10, and 12 PassMark tests, which are not part of the FirePro's recorded data. Therefore, the head-to-head results should be viewed as the definitive comparison for this specific pair.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card, the FirePro S9300 X2 sits within a tight cluster. Its average score of 32,540 is only 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). This indicates that the FirePro, in its own benchmark context, is a mid-pack performer relative to its peers. In contrast, the RX 6800M's average of 28,874 is 0.4% above the AMD Radeon RX 570 (28,766) and 1% above the AMD Radeon R9 M295X (28,580). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28,996) by 0.4% and the Intel Arc A370M (29,175) by 1%. The RX 6800M's position among its rivals is similarly tight, but at a lower absolute score level, reflecting the different benchmark mixes.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6800M wins both shared benchmark tests, so the case for it is straightforward. In Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, it is the clear victor. The data shows no shared test where the FirePro S9300 X2 comes out ahead. The FirePro's strengths, if any, would have to be inferred from its position among its own nearest rivals rather than from a direct comparison with the RX 6800M.

The FirePro S9300 X2 does have a higher average benchmark score (32,540) than the RX 6800M (28,874), but this is not a fair apples-to-apples comparison because the benchmark suites differ. The FirePro's two scores are both relatively high for the tests it took, while the RX 6800M's eleven scores include several low ones that pull its average down. For instance, the RX 6800M scores only 65 in PassMark DirectX 12, 101 in PassMark DirectX 10, and 147 in PassMark DirectX 9. These legacy tests are not in the FirePro's benchmark list, so they do not factor into its average.

In terms of use-case split, the RX 6800M is the better choice for any workload that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration, which covers most modern compute and graphics tasks. The FirePro S9300 X2, with its higher percentile rank (77th vs 74th) and higher average score in its limited test set, might appeal to a user looking at a legacy compute card with a specific benchmark profile. However, the head-to-head data does not support any scenario where the FirePro wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses the "Capsaicin" chip, based on the GCN 3.0 architecture, and is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 6800M uses the "Navi 22" chip, based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, and is manufactured on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. This process difference is significant: the RX 6800M's die is 335 mm² and contains 17,200 million transistors, while the FirePro's die is 596 mm² and contains 8,900 million transistors. The transistor density tells the story clearly: the RX 6800M has 51.3 million transistors per square millimeter, versus the FirePro's 14.9 million per square millimeter. The newer process allows the RX 6800M to pack more than three times the density.

The FirePro has 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations units. The RX 6800M has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the RX 6800M achieves higher pixel and texture rates: 153.0 GPixel/s and 382.4 GTexel/s, compared to the FirePro's 62.40 GPixel/s and 249.6 GTexel/s. This is due to the much higher clock speeds on the RX 6800M, which has a base clock of 2116 MHz, a game clock of 2300 MHz, and a boost clock of 2390 MHz. The FirePro has no recorded base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective).

The RX 6800M also features 40 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the FirePro. The FirePro's API support includes DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RX 6800M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing and mesh shaders. The Vulkan versions also differ: the FirePro supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 6800M supports Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is memory. The FirePro has 4 GB of HBM memory on a 4096-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The RX 6800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The FirePro has a wider bus and higher bandwidth, but the RX 6800M has three times the capacity. The memory clock differs as well: the FirePro's memory runs at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective), while the RX 6800M's runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

The power characteristics are starkly different. The FirePro has a TDP of 300 W, requires a dual-slot cooler, uses 2x 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 700 W. The RX 6800M has a TDP of 145 W, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The FirePro is 267 mm long (10.5 inches) and 111 mm tall (4.4 inches), while the RX 6800M has no recorded dimensions.

The bus interface differs: the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 6800M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the FirePro has no outputs, while the RX 6800M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it relies on the laptop's display connection.

The compute throughput figures favor the RX 6800M. Its FP32 performance is 12.24 TFLOPS, versus the FirePro's 7.987 TFLOPS. The RX 6800M also has FP16 performance of 24.47 TFLOPS (2:1), while the FirePro has no recorded FP16 figure. The release dates are far apart: the FirePro launched on 2016-03-30, while the RX 6800M launched on 2021-05-30. Both are end-of-life, but the FirePro has a launch MSRP of 5,999 USD, which can be stated once as the launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800M wins with a score of 87,621, compared to the FirePro S9300 X2's 27,971. The delta is -68.1% from the FirePro's perspective.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 has an average benchmark score of 32,540, while the RX 6800M has an average of 28,874. The FirePro is in the 77th percentile of all GPUs, and the RX 6800M is in the 74th percentile.

Q: Does the FirePro S9300 X2 support ray tracing?

A: No, the FirePro has no ray tracing cores. The RX 6800M has 40 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro only supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Q: What are the memory capacities and types?

A: The FirePro has 4 GB of HBM memory on a 4096-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 has a TDP of 300 W, while the RX 6800M has a TDP of 145 W. The FirePro requires a dual-slot cooler and 2x 8-pin power connectors, while the RX 6800M is an IGP with no power connectors.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The FirePro has 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die (28 nm process), while the RX 6800M has 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die (7 nm process). The RX 6800M has a much higher transistor density at 51.3M per mm² versus 14.9M per mm².

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD Radeon RX 6800M in the two shared benchmarks. It wins Geekbench OpenCL by a delta of -68.1% and Geekbench Vulkan by a delta of -60.8% relative to the FirePro. The RX 6800M also has higher FP32 performance (12.24 TFLOPS vs 7.987 TFLOPS), higher pixel and texture rates, and supports ray tracing, which the FirePro lacks entirely. The RX 6800M is built on a much newer 7 nm process with a smaller die and higher transistor density, indicating a more modern and efficient design. Its TDP is less than half that of the FirePro (145 W vs 300 W), and it is an IGP, while the FirePro is a dual-slot card with external power connectors.

The FirePro S9300 X2 does have a higher average benchmark score (32,540 vs 28,874) and a higher percentile rank (77th vs 74th), but this is based on a limited benchmark set of only two tests. Those two tests are exactly the ones where it loses to the RX 6800M. The FirePro also has a wider memory bus (4096-bit) and higher memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s), but its 4 GB capacity is one-third of the RX 6800M's 12 GB. The FirePro has more shading units (4,096 vs 2,560), but the RX 6800M's higher clocks and newer architecture more than compensate.

For any user selecting between these two, the RX 6800M is the clear choice based on the recorded data. It offers superior compute performance in both OpenCL and Vulkan, a more modern feature set including ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate, and a much lower power draw. The FirePro's only advantages are its higher average score in a limited test suite, its wider memory bus, and its higher bandwidth, none of which translate into a win in the head-to-head benchmarks. The RX 6800M is the better performer in every shared test, and the architecture differences support that conclusion.