AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Comparison

AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 is the dominant performer in this comparison, winning both recorded head-to-head benchmarks by a massive margin. The data shows a clear generational and architectural gap, with the RTX 8000 delivering over three times the OpenCL score and more than three times the Vulkan score of the AMD FirePro S9300 X2. While the AMD card holds its own in its respective performance percentile, the NVIDIA card's absolute scores are in a different league, making it the definitive choice for compute-heavy workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has a higher average benchmark score of 32,540 compared to the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000's 28,421. However, this average is skewed by the fact that the RTX 8000 has nine recorded benchmarks, including several low DirectX scores, while the AMD card only has two high-scoring compute tests.

Q: What is the performance difference in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 101,883 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 72.5% higher than the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's score of 27,971. This indicates the NVIDIA card is significantly faster for general-purpose GPU compute tasks.

Q: How do the cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 122,637, a 69.7% advantage over the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's 37,109. The RTX 8000's lead is substantial across both API benchmarks.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has 4 GB of HBM memory. This is a twelve-fold difference in capacity, making the RTX 8000 far more suitable for large datasets.

Q: What are the architectural differences in process nodes?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 uses a 28 nm process with GCN 3.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 uses a 12 nm process with Turing architecture. The newer 12 nm node allows for a much higher transistor density.

Q: Which card has dedicated ray tracing cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 has dedicated hardware, featuring 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has no such specialized units, relying solely on its 4096 shading units.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 is built on the GCN 3.0 architecture using the Capsaicin chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 8,900 million transistors on a 596 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 14.9 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 uses the Turing architecture with the TU102 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 18,600 million transistors on a larger 754 mm² die, achieving a higher transistor density of 24.7 million per square millimeter. This fundamental difference in manufacturing technology gives the RTX 8000 a significant advantage in raw compute density.

Memory architecture diverges sharply between the two. The AMD card uses 4 GB of HBM memory with a 4096-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite the narrower bus, the RTX 8000 offers higher total bandwidth and vastly more capacity. The AMD card's memory runs at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective), while the NVIDIA card's memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), which is a key factor in its bandwidth advantage.

The compute feature set also differs markedly. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 has 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, along with 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. The RTX 8000's additional specialized hardware enables ray tracing and AI acceleration, capabilities completely absent from the AMD card. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, indicating newer API feature levels.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data consists of two benchmark tests, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 8000 scores 101,883 against the FirePro S9300 X2's 27,971, a delta of 72.5% in favor of NVIDIA. This means the RTX 8000 delivers roughly 3.6 times the OpenCL performance of the AMD card. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 8000 scores 122,637 against 37,109, a 69.7% lead, translating to roughly 3.3 times the Vulkan performance.

The AMD card's performance, while clearly lower in absolute terms, is not without context. The FirePro S9300 X2 has a percentile rank of 77 among all GPUs, placing it above the RTX 8000's percentile of 74. This indicates that the AMD card is relatively strong within the broader GPU landscape, but the RTX 8000's percentile is pulled down by its low DirectX scores. The RTX 8000's PassMark DirectX scores are notably weak, ranging from 79 in DirectX 12 to 211 in DirectX 9, and its PassMark G3D score is 19,799 with a G2D score of 866. These scores suggest the RTX 8000 is optimized for compute workloads rather than legacy graphics APIs.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database, the FirePro S9300 X2 sits close to the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME with a delta of -0.2%, and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE with a delta of 0.3%. The RTX 8000's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M295X at -0.6% and the AMD FirePro S7150 at 1.1%. These proximity values show that while the RTX 8000 has a lower average score, its compute-specific benchmarks are far superior, and its average is diluted by the inclusion of several low DirectX results.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has a TDP of 300 W with a suggested PSU of 700 W, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 has a lower TDP of 260 W and a suggested PSU of 600 W. Power connectors differ as well: the AMD card requires 2x 8-pin connectors, while the NVIDIA card needs 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin. Both cards are dual-slot and share identical dimensions of 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height.

Clock speeds only appear for the NVIDIA card, which has a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz. The AMD card's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database. The NVIDIA card also lists a game clock as null, while the AMD card does not report one. The memory clocks differ substantially, with the AMD card at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective) and the NVIDIA card at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Display outputs present a stark contrast. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C, allowing it to function as a display-capable workstation card. The bus interface is identical at PCIe 3.0 x16 for both. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 5,999 USD, while the NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 9,999 USD.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 for any compute-heavy workload. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 101,883 and Vulkan score of 122,637 dwarf the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's scores of 27,971 and 37,109, respectively. The RTX 8000's 48 GB of memory, higher bandwidth, and dedicated RT and tensor cores make it a far more capable and versatile compute accelerator. The AMD card's higher average benchmark score and percentile rank are artifacts of its limited benchmark set, not indicators of superior performance in real-world tasks.

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 is a dated part from 2016, built on older 28 nm technology with only 4 GB of memory. Its performance, while respectable for its era, cannot compete with the 2018 Turing architecture of the RTX 8000. The NVIDIA card offers more than double the FP32 throughput (16.31 TFLOPS vs 7.987 TFLOPS), higher pixel rate (169.9 GPixel/s vs 62.40 GPixel/s), and higher texture rate (509.8 GTexel/s vs 249.6 GTexel/s). The RTX 8000 also supports FP16 at 32.62 TFLOPS, a feature entirely absent from the AMD card.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 wins in every recorded compute benchmark, including Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan. Its 48 GB memory capacity and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large-scale data processing, AI inference, and ray tracing workloads. The presence of 576 tensor cores and 72 RT cores means it can accelerate modern deep learning and rendering tasks that the AMD card cannot handle. Its display outputs also allow it to serve as a workstation GPU for visual computing, not just a compute server part.

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 wins in the narrower sense of its average benchmark score (32,540 vs 28,421) and its higher percentile rank (77 vs 74). This is due to its two strong compute scores without the burden of low DirectX results. In the context of its nearest rivals, the AMD card performs within 0.5% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE and the AMD FirePro S10000, indicating it remains competitive in its own performance tier. However, against the RTX 8000, it loses decisively on every meaningful compute metric. The AMD card is best suited for legacy compute tasks that do not require large memory capacities or modern API features, where its 4 GB HBM and GCN 3.0 architecture may still find a niche in older software environments.