AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile vs AMD FirePro S9300 X2

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile and AMD FirePro S9300 X2 are both end-of-life products, but they come from different eras and serve different purposes. The RTX 3050 Mobile is a 2021 laptop GPU built on Ampere, while the FirePro S9300 X2 is a 2016 dual-GPU server card built on GCN 3.0. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner: the RTX 3050 Mobile wins both head-to-head tests, with an average benchmark score of 33,170 against the FirePro's 32,540, a 1.9% gap. The RTX 3050 Mobile also edges out the FirePro in percentile ranking, sitting at the 78th percentile versus the FirePro's 77th percentile. However, the two GPUs have radically different architectures, power requirements, and intended use cases that deserve closer inspection.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result comes from the Geekbench OpenCL test. The RTX 3050 Mobile scores 50,038, while the FirePro S9300 X2 manages only 27,971. That is a 78.9% advantage for the NVIDIA card — a massive margin that reflects not just raw compute but also driver optimization and modern architecture efficiency. The FirePro's older GCN 3.0 design, with its 28 nm process, simply cannot keep pace in OpenCL workloads that favor newer instruction sets and memory architectures.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows but still favors NVIDIA. The RTX 3050 Mobile scores 49,051 versus the FirePro's 37,109, a 32.2% lead. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can benefit from raw hardware throughput, and the FirePro's dual-GPU configuration (4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 64 ROPs) does help it close some ground. However, the RTX 3050 Mobile's 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs are more efficient per unit, and its 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores add capabilities the FirePro lacks entirely. The FirePro has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores — those fields are null in the data.

Notably, the RTX 3050 Mobile has a third benchmark result — 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 scoring 421 — that the FirePro does not share. This means the head-to-head comparison is limited to the two Geekbench tests. The FirePro's lack of a DX12 benchmark result is telling: its API support caps at DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RTX 3050 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the older card cannot handle.

Looking at the nearest rivals, the RTX 3050 Mobile sits in a tight cluster. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon Pro 570, which scores 33,207 — just 0.1% higher. The NVIDIA T550 Mobile scores 33,161, essentially tied at 0% delta. The NVIDIA P104-100 scores 32,982 (0.6% behind), and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile scores 32,849 (1% behind). This tells us the RTX 3050 Mobile is right at the median of its performance class, neither a standout nor a laggard among comparable GPUs.

The FirePro S9300 X2, meanwhile, is surrounded by a more varied group. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME at 32,601 (0.2% ahead), followed by the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE at 32,456 (0.3% behind), the AMD FirePro S10000 at 32,388 (0.5% behind), and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile at 32,849 (0.9% behind). The FirePro's 32,540 average score places it in a similar performance band, but its architecture is over five years older, which explains why it needs so much more power and physical space to achieve comparable numbers.

The per-test deltas tell the real story. In OpenCL, the RTX 3050 Mobile's 78.9% lead is the single biggest win in this comparison. In Vulkan, the 32.2% margin is still decisive but less overwhelming. The FirePro's dual-GPU design may help in multi-threaded Vulkan workloads, but it cannot overcome the NVIDIA card's architectural advantages in API-level efficiency.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most users: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile wins both head-to-head benchmarks and has a higher average score, a higher percentile ranking, and a much more modern feature set. It also consumes only 45 W of power compared to the FirePro's 300 W, and it fits in an IGP form factor rather than a dual-slot card requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 700 W suggested PSU.

The RTX 3050 Mobile is the practical choice for anyone building or upgrading a system that needs modern graphics features. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 means it can handle current and near-future games and applications. The FirePro S9300 X2, with its DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170 support, is already behind on API compatibility. The FirePro also has no display outputs, making it a compute-only card, while the RTX 3050 Mobile's outputs are portable-device dependent, meaning it can drive displays in a laptop context.

The FirePro S9300 X2 does hold one advantage: raw memory bandwidth. Its 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus delivers 512.0 GB/s, versus the RTX 3050 Mobile's 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus at 192.0 GB/s. The FirePro also has higher pixel rate (62.40 GPixel/s vs 42.98 GPixel/s) and texture rate (249.6 GTexel/s vs 85.95 GTexel/s), plus higher FP32 throughput (7.987 TFLOPS vs 5.501 TFLOPS). These numbers suggest the FirePro could win in compute-heavy workloads that are not captured by the Geekbench tests — but the benchmark evidence we have shows it losing decisively.

The FirePro's launch MSRP was 5,999 USD. The RTX 3050 Mobile has no listed launch MSRP. Given the FirePro's age and power requirements, it is difficult to recommend it unless you specifically need its dual-GPU compute capabilities and can accommodate its 300 W TDP and 267 mm length. For nearly any other purpose, the RTX 3050 Mobile is the better choice.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 33,170, compared to the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's 32,540, a difference of 1.9%.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3050 Mobile in OpenCL?

A: The RTX 3050 Mobile scores 50,038 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the FirePro S9300 X2 scores 27,971, giving the NVIDIA card a 78.9% advantage.

Q: Does the FirePro S9300 X2 support ray tracing?

A: No. The FirePro S9300 X2 has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 3050 Mobile has 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 3050 Mobile has a 45 W TDP and uses no power connectors. The FirePro S9300 X2 has a 300 W TDP, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and needs a 700 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 has 512.0 GB/s bandwidth from 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus. The RTX 3050 Mobile has 192.0 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 was released on 2016-03-30, while the RTX 3050 Mobile was released on 2021-05-10, a gap of roughly five years.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification category. The RTX 3050 Mobile uses the GA107 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses the Capsaicin chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: 43.5M per mm² for NVIDIA versus 14.9M per mm² for AMD.

Clock speeds are not directly comparable because the FirePro lists no base or boost clocks. The RTX 3050 Mobile has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz. The FirePro's memory clock is 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective), while the RTX 3050 Mobile's memory runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Memory configurations differ sharply. The RTX 3050 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro's memory system is vastly wider, but the RTX 3050 Mobile's GDDR6 runs at much higher effective speeds.

Shader resources also differ. The RTX 3050 Mobile has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro S9300 X2 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs — double or quadruple the NVIDIA card in each category. However, the RTX 3050 Mobile's advantage comes from its 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores, which the FirePro lacks.

Power and physical design are polar opposites. The RTX 3050 Mobile is a 45 W IGP with no power connectors, while the FirePro S9300 X2 is a 300 W dual-slot card with 2x 8-pin connectors and a 700 W suggested PSU. The FirePro is 267 mm long and 111 mm high. The RTX 3050 Mobile's dimensions are not listed. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA, PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is generational. The RTX 3050 Mobile is built on Ampere, NVIDIA's second-generation RTX architecture, which brings support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses GCN 3.0, AMD's third-generation Graphics Core Next design, which tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.2.170, and OpenGL 4.6.

The RTX 3050 Mobile includes dedicated ray tracing cores (16) and tensor cores (64), enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The FirePro has neither, making it a pure compute card without accelerated ray tracing or tensor operations. The FirePro's FP32 throughput is higher at 7.987 TFLOPS versus 5.501 TFLOPS, but the RTX 3050 Mobile also supports FP16 at 5.501 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the FirePro's FP16 performance is not listed.

The process node difference is significant: 8 nm Samsung for NVIDIA versus 28 nm TSMC for AMD. This explains the transistor density gap (43.5M/mm² vs 14.9M/mm²) and the power efficiency difference (45 W vs 300 W). The FirePro's die is nearly three times larger at 596 mm² versus 200 mm², yet it holds only 200 million more transistors, reflecting the older process technology.

The FirePro S9300 X2 is part of the FirePro Server generation, with a predecessor in FirePro Terascale and a successor in Radeon Pro GCN. The RTX 3050 Mobile's predecessor is the GeForce 20 Mobile series, and it has no listed successor. The FirePro also has no display outputs, while the RTX 3050 Mobile's outputs are portable-device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile wins on every benchmark measured. It takes the Geekbench OpenCL test by 78.9% and the Geekbench Vulkan test by 32.2%. It also has a higher average score (33,170 vs 32,540), a higher percentile ranking (78th vs 77th), and a third benchmark result (3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 421) that the FirePro cannot match. Its modern API support, lower power draw, and compact IGP form factor make it the better all-around choice for laptop or small-form-factor builds.

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 wins on raw hardware specifications. It has more shading units (4096 vs 2048), more TMUs (256 vs 64), more ROPs (64 vs 32), higher pixel rate (62.40 GPixel/s vs 42.98 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (249.6 GTexel/s vs 85.95 GTexel/s), higher FP32 throughput (7.987 TFLOPS vs 5.501 TFLOPS), and massively higher memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s vs 192.0 GB/s). Its 4096-bit memory bus is unmatched by the RTX 3050 Mobile's 128-bit bus. In compute-heavy server workloads that are not captured by Geekbench — such as certain scientific or professional rendering tasks — the FirePro's raw specs could translate to wins, though the benchmark data we have does not show this.

For gaming and general-purpose use, the RTX 3050 Mobile is the obvious pick. For compute-only server workloads where memory bandwidth and raw FP32 are paramount, the FirePro S9300 X2 has theoretical advantages, but its 300 W power draw, lack of display outputs, and older API support make it a niche choice. The RTX 3050 Mobile's wins are measured and verified; the FirePro's advantages are speculative based on specifications alone.