AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q Comparison

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 and NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q are both end-of-life server/workstation parts with no display outputs, but they serve fundamentally different purposes. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, yet the specification sheets reveal why these cards were built for entirely separate workloads. The FirePro S9300 X2 is a compute-first monster, while the GRID M60-1Q is a virtualization-oriented board. This analysis breaks down their respective strengths, architectural choices, and benchmark performance based solely on the provided facts.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 wins the only direct benchmark comparison available. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, it scores 37109 against the GRID M60-1Q's 31220, a delta of 18.9%. This is a decisive victory in a modern, low-level graphics API. The FirePro's wins extend beyond this single test; its average benchmark score of 32540 places it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs, while the GRID M60-1Q's average score of 31220 puts it in the 76th percentile. While the percentile difference is small, the raw score gap is substantial.

The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q has no benchmark wins in the provided data. Its sole recorded benchmark is the Geekbench Vulkan score of 31220, which is lower than the FirePro's score in the same test. However, the GRID card's architecture and specifications suggest its intended use case is not raw compute performance but rather virtualized desktop infrastructure, where its lower power draw and smaller memory footprint could be advantageous in dense server deployments. The data does not include any virtualization-specific benchmarks, so its strengths there remain qualitative.

The FirePro S9300 X2's higher average benchmark score (32540 vs 31220) and its 18.9% lead in the Vulkan test indicate it is the clear winner for compute-heavy workloads. Its 4 GB of HBM memory with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth is nearly 3.2 times the bandwidth of the GRID's GDDR5, which makes it far better suited for memory-bandwidth-intensive tasks like scientific simulation or machine learning inference.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture, built on a chip codenamed "Capsaicin". The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on the GM204 chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The AMD chip is physically massive. It packs 8,900 million transistors onto a 596 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 14.9M / mm². The NVIDIA chip is smaller, with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, giving it a density of 13.1M / mm². The FirePro's larger transistor count translates directly into more compute resources: it has 4096 shading units and 256 texture mapping units, exactly double the GRID's 2048 shading units and 128 TMUs. Both cards have 64 ROPs.

Memory architecture is where the two diverge most sharply. The FirePro uses 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GRID M60-1Q uses just 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 160.4 GB/s. This is a 3.2x advantage in bandwidth for the AMD card. The FirePro also has a higher memory clock at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective) compared to the GRID's 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), though the latter's GDDR5 relies on a much narrower bus.

The API support also differs. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GRID M60-1Q supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card has a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 12_0) and a newer Vulkan version, which could matter for certain modern workloads. However, the FirePro's raw compute throughput in the Vulkan benchmark suggests its older API version is not a practical hindrance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench Vulkan test. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 scores 37109, while the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q scores 31220. This gives the FirePro an 18.9% advantage. This is a significant margin, indicating that the FirePro's higher shading unit count and vastly superior memory bandwidth translate into real-world performance gains in a modern graphics API.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for these scores. The FirePro's average benchmark score of 32540 is remarkably close to the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (32601, delta -0.2%), the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32456, delta 0.3%), and the AMD FirePro S10000 (32388, delta 0.5%). The NVIDIA T600 Mobile sits slightly higher at 32849 (delta -0.9%). This indicates the FirePro S9300 X2, despite being an older server part, performs in the same league as much newer consumer and professional GPUs.

The GRID M60-1Q's average score of 31220 places it near the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (31206, delta 0%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (31087, delta 0.4%), and slightly below the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31532, delta -1%) and NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31676, delta -1.4%). This shows the GRID card is competitive with a wide range of NVIDIA parts, but it trails the FirePro in the direct comparison.

It is worth noting the FirePro's Vulkan score of 37109 is significantly higher than its average score of 32540. This suggests the Vulkan test is particularly favorable to its architecture. The GRID M60-1Q's only benchmark is its Vulkan score, so no such discrepancy can be observed for it.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key areas where the two cards differ, based only on the provided data.

| Specification | AMD FirePro S9300 X2 | NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Transistors | 8,900 million | 5,200 million |

| Die Size | 596 mm² | 398 mm² |

| Base Clock | Not specified | 557 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 1178 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | HBM | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 4096 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 160.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 256 | 128 |

| Pixel Rate | 62.40 GPixel/s | 75.39 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 249.6 GTexel/s | 150.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.987 TFLOPS | 4.825 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 300 W | 225 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 550 W |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Launch MSRP | 5,999 USD | Not specified |

The FirePro has double the shading units, TMUs, and memory bandwidth. Its FP32 compute of 7.987 TFLOPS is 65.5% higher than the GRID's 4.825 TFLOPS. However, the GRID has a higher pixel rate (75.39 vs 62.40 GPixel/s) despite having the same 64 ROPs, due to its higher boost clock. The GRID also has a significantly lower TDP of 225 W versus the FirePro's 300 W, and requires a smaller power supply.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 scores 37109, which is 18.9% higher than the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q's score of 31220.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 has 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its 4 GB HBM memory on a 4096-bit bus, while the GRID M60-1Q has 160.4 GB/s from its 1024 MB GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: What are the FP32 compute capabilities of each card?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GRID M60-1Q delivers 4.825 TFLOPS.

Q: Do these cards have any display outputs?

A: No. Both the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 and the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q are listed as having "No outputs".

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die, compared to the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q's 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The FirePro S9300 X2 has a TDP of 300 W and requires a 700 W power supply, while the GRID M60-1Q has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W power supply.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for raw compute performance: the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 is the superior card. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 18.9%, has 65.5% higher FP32 throughput, and offers over three times the memory bandwidth. Its nearest rivals in overall average score include the Radeon RX 7900 GRE and the Quadro-class parts, indicating it holds its own against much newer hardware. For any workload that depends on massive parallel compute or high memory bandwidth — such as scientific computing, data analysis, or rendering — the FirePro S9300 X2 is the clear choice based on this data.

The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q, while less powerful in raw numbers, has its own profile. Its lower TDP of 225 W and single 8-pin power connector make it easier to integrate into dense server environments. Its higher pixel rate of 75.39 GPixel/s, despite fewer shading units, suggests it may be more efficient at certain rasterization tasks. The GRID card's average score of 31220 places it in the same percentile (76th) as the FirePro (77th), showing that it is not a slouch. Its support for DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4 also gives it a more modern API feature set. However, without any virtualization-specific benchmarks in the data, its intended strength cannot be quantified here.

Ultimately, the choice depends on the workload. If the task is compute-heavy and memory-bound, the FirePro S9300 X2's 18.9% benchmark lead and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the only rational pick. If the priority is lower power draw and the workload is less demanding on memory bandwidth, the GRID M60-1Q's 225 W TDP and 75.39 GPixel/s pixel rate offer a different balance. The FirePro's launch MSRP of 5,999 USD also reflects its enterprise compute positioning, whereas the GRID card has no listed MSRP. For pure performance per the provided benchmarks, the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 wins decisively.