AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB and AMD FirePro S9300 X2 represent two very different eras of workstation computing, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the newer NVIDIA card, but the AMD part remains a fascinating study in extreme bandwidth and raw compute density. In the single head-to-head benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A2000 delivers a score of 66,998 against the FirePro’s 27,971, a massive 139.5% advantage. This dominance is reflected in the average benchmark scores, where the RTX A2000 posts 34,154 against the FirePro’s 32,540.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL compute test, and it is not close. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB scores 66,998, while the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 manages only 27,971. This translates to a 139.5% performance delta in favor of the NVIDIA card. The margin is stark, indicating a generational leap in compute efficiency and driver optimization for OpenCL workloads. It is importantly the FirePro S9300 X2 does not have a corresponding Vulkan benchmark result in the data, whereas the RTX A2000’s OpenCL score alone accounts for its win count of one. The data shows zero wins for the AMD card in this direct matchup.

Beyond the head-to-head, the average benchmark scores contextualize the overall performance envelope. The RTX A2000’s average score of 34,154 places it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro S9300 X2 sits at the 77th percentile with an average of 32,540. The delta between their nearest rivals further illustrates their competitive positioning. The RTX A2000 is virtually tied with the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (0.1% faster), the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (0.2% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX 480 (0.5% faster). Meanwhile, the FirePro S9300 X2 is bracketed by the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (0.2% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (0.3% faster), and the AMD FirePro S10000 (0.5% faster). This data suggests that while the FirePro’s absolute compute potential is high, its real-world application scores are more modest, likely due to its older architecture and specialized server focus.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is profound. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 is built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process at Samsung, packing 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 uses the older GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 8,900 million transistors spread across a much larger 596 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 14.9 million per square millimeter. The efficiency of the newer process is evident in the power figures: the RTX A2000 has a 70 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, while the FirePro S9300 X2 has a 300 W TDP and demands two 8-pin power connectors.

Memory configurations also highlight the divergent design philosophies. The RTX A2000 offers 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro S9300 X2, however, uses 4 GB of HBM memory on a massive 4096-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD card’s memory bandwidth is significantly higher, but its capacity is a third of the NVIDIA card’s. The RTX A2000 also features modern compute essentials like 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads, features entirely absent from the FirePro S9300 X2, which has no RT or tensor cores listed.

The compute unit counts tell a story of raw throughput versus feature richness. The FirePro S9300 X2 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, compared to the RTX A2000’s 3328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Despite having more shaders, the FirePro’s FP32 performance is identical to the RTX A2000 at 7.987 TFLOPS. The texture fill rate favors the AMD card at 249.6 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate is also higher at 62.40 GPixel/s versus 57.60 GPixel/s. However, these raw throughput advantages do not translate into better real-world scores in the data.

The Verdict

The data makes a compelling case for the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB as the superior all-around workstation card. Its 139.5% lead in the OpenCL benchmark, combined with a higher average benchmark score and better percentile ranking, indicates that it handles general compute tasks far more effectively. The RTX A2000 is also significantly more power-efficient, drawing 70 W compared to the FirePro’s 300 W, and it features display outputs (4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the FirePro S9300 X2 has none. For any workstation requiring visual output, the FirePro is disqualified outright.

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2, however, has a specific niche. Its 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 4096-bit bus are designed for server-side compute tasks where memory throughput is the bottleneck. The data shows it still performs competitively in average benchmark scores, sitting close to modern cards like the Radeon RX 7900 GRE. Yet, the lack of display outputs and the higher power draw limit its appeal. The RTX A2000 is the clear choice for a professional needing a balance of compute, efficiency, and display capability. The FirePro is a relic of a specialized era, better suited for legacy server deployments than new purchases.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB has a higher average benchmark score of 34,154, compared to the AMD FirePro S9300 X2’s 32,540.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A2000 in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX A2000 scores 66,998 versus the FirePro S9300 X2’s 27,971, representing a 139.5% performance advantage.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 support display outputs?

A: No, the FirePro S9300 X2 has no display outputs, while the RTX A2000 features four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connections.

Q: What is the memory capacity and type for each card?

A: The RTX A2000 has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the FirePro S9300 X2 has 4 GB of HBM memory.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has higher memory bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s, compared to the RTX A2000’s 288.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX A2000 has a 70 W TDP, while the FirePro S9300 X2 has a 300 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB wins decisively in compute tasks measured by OpenCL, delivering a 139.5% higher score. Its 12 GB memory capacity is triple the FirePro’s 4 GB, making it better suited for large datasets that fit within a single frame buffer. The RTX A2000 also wins on power efficiency, with a 70 W TDP versus 300 W, and it is the only one of the two that can drive displays. Its modern features, including RT cores and tensor cores, give it a functional edge for any workload involving ray tracing or AI inference, even if no benchmark data is provided for those specific tasks.

The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 wins solely on memory bandwidth, offering 512.0 GB/s against the RTX A2000’s 288.0 GB/s. This suggests it could have an advantage in memory-bound server workloads that do not rely heavily on general compute performance. Its higher texture fill rate (249.6 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (62.40 GPixel/s) also indicate potential strengths in specific rasterization-heavy tasks, though these do not appear in the benchmark results. The FirePro’s 4096 shading units provide a raw compute core count advantage, but the identical FP32 TFLOPS figure (7.987) shows this does not translate into higher throughput. For a modern workstation, the RTX A2000 is the better investment; for a legacy server with specific bandwidth requirements, the FirePro S9300 X2 retains a narrow, specialized purpose.