AMD FirePro S9300 X2 vs NVIDIA T1000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has a higher average benchmark score of 36,289 compared to the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's 32,540. This places the T1000 at the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro S9300 X2 sits at the 77th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 37,704, which is 34.8% higher than the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's score of 27,971 in the same test.

Q: Which GPU performs better in Vulkan workloads?

A: The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 takes the Vulkan test with a score of 37,109, while the NVIDIA T1000 scores 34,874. The AMD card leads by 6% in this specific benchmark.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: Both cards have 4 GB of memory, but they use different types and bus widths. The T1000 uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro S9300 X2 uses HBM on a 4096-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has a TDP of 50 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has a TDP of 300 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and needs a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 has no display outputs at all, making it a compute-only accelerator.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA T1000 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU117 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,700 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The card belongs to the Quadro Turing generation (Tx000 series).

In contrast, the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture with the Capsaicin chip, built on an older 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 8,900 million transistors spread across a much larger 596 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 14.9 million per square millimeter. This card belongs to the FirePro Server generation (Sx300 series).

The compute resources differ substantially. The T1000 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro S9300 X2 is far more heavily provisioned with 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This gives the AMD card significantly higher theoretical throughput: 7.987 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.500 TFLOPS for the T1000. The FirePro also leads in texture rate (249.6 GTexel/s versus 78.12 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (62.40 GPixel/s versus 44.64 GPixel/s).

Memory architecture is another major divider. The T1000 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro S9300 X2 uses 4 GB of HBM on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s, which is more than three times the bandwidth of the T1000. The FirePro's memory clock is listed at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective), while the T1000's memory runs at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective).

The T1000 supports FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, offering 5.000 TFLOPS, while the FirePro lists no FP16 capability. API support differs slightly: the T1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Physical design also diverges. The T1000 is a single-slot card, 156 mm long and 69 mm tall, with no power connectors. The FirePro S9300 X2 is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, requiring two 8-pin power connectors. The T1000 has four mini-DisplayPort outputs; the FirePro has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split result across the two benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA T1000 delivers a score of 37,704 against the AMD FirePro S9300 X2's 27,971. This is a decisive 34.8% advantage for the T1000. The margin is substantial and suggests the T1000's architecture handles OpenCL compute workloads more efficiently despite having far fewer shading units and lower raw FP32 throughput.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the tables turn. The AMD FirePro S9300 X2 scores 37,109, while the NVIDIA T1000 scores 34,874. The AMD card leads by 6% in this test. While the margin is smaller than the T1000's OpenCL win, it still represents a clear victory for the FirePro in Vulkan-based workloads.

The average benchmark scores reflect the split nature of the results. The T1000 averages 36,289 across its benchmark entries, placing it at the 80th percentile of all GPUs. The FirePro S9300 X2 averages 32,540, placing it at the 77th percentile. The T1000's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5300M (36,529, 0.7% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (36,530, 0.7% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860, 1.2% lower), and the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 (35,520, 2.2% lower). The FirePro's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (32,601, 0.2% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32,456, 0.3% lower), the AMD FirePro S10000 (32,388, 0.5% lower), and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile (32,849, 0.9% lower).

The wins are evenly split at one each. The T1000's win in OpenCL is by a much larger margin (34.8%) than the FirePro's win in Vulkan (6%), which contributes to the T1000's higher average score and percentile ranking.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split based on workload type. For OpenCL-heavy applications, the NVIDIA T1000 is the stronger performer by a wide margin, delivering 34.8% higher scores. For Vulkan-based workloads, the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 takes the lead, though by a smaller 6% margin.

The T1000 also holds the overall average score advantage (36,289 versus 32,540) and ranks higher in the global percentile (80th versus 77th). Its nearest rivals include cards like the GTX TITAN X and Quadro GV100, which places it in respectable company. The FirePro's nearest rivals include the RX 590 GME and RX 7900 GRE, which reflects a lower overall standing.

The T1000's advantages extend beyond raw scores. It is a single-slot card with no external power connectors, a 50 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of just 250 W. It also has display outputs, making it usable in workstation environments where video output is needed. The FirePro S9300 X2, by contrast, is a dual-slot, 300 W card requiring two 8-pin connectors, a 700 W suggested PSU, and has no display outputs. Its launch MSRP was 5,999 USD.

For users prioritizing OpenCL compute performance, energy efficiency, and display capability, the T1000 is the data-supported choice. For users who need Vulkan performance and can accommodate a high-power, compute-only accelerator, the FirePro S9300 X2 holds the edge in that specific test.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA T1000 | AMD FirePro S9300 X2 |

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

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 3.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 8,900 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 596 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 14.9M / mm² |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 896 | 4,096 |

| TMUs | 56 | 256 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 44.64 GPixel/s | 62.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 78.12 GTexel/s | 249.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.500 TFLOPS | 7.987 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.000 TFLOPS (2:1) | None |

| TDP | 50 W | 300 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 700 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 156 mm x 69 mm | 267 mm x 111 mm |

| Release Date | May 2021 | March 2016 |

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA T1000 wins in:

• Geekbench OpenCL: 37,704 versus 27,971, a 34.8% advantage
• Average benchmark score: 36,289 versus 32,540
• Global percentile ranking: 80th versus 77th
• Power efficiency: 50 W TDP with no power connectors versus 300 W TDP with two 8-pin connectors
• Physical footprint: single-slot, 156 mm length versus dual-slot, 267 mm length
• Display capability: four mini-DisplayPort outputs versus none
• FP16 compute: 5.000 TFLOPS available, while the FirePro has no FP16 listing
• Newer release date: May 2021 versus March 2016
• Newer architecture: Turing (12 nm) versus GCN 3.0 (28 nm)
• Higher transistor density: 23.5M / mm² versus 14.9M / mm²

AMD FirePro S9300 X2 wins in:

• Geekbench Vulkan: 37,109 versus 34,874, a 6% advantage
• Memory bandwidth: 512.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s
• Memory bus width: 4096 bit versus 128 bit
• Shading units: 4,096 versus 896
• Texture mapping units: 256 versus 56
• ROPs: 64 versus 32
• FP32 throughput: 7.987 TFLOPS versus 2.500 TFLOPS
• Texture rate: 249.6 GTexel/s versus 78.12 GTexel/s
• Pixel rate: 62.40 GPixel/s versus 44.64 GPixel/s
• Transistor count: 8,900 million versus 4,700 million

The data shows a compute-heavy card in the FirePro S9300 X2 that excels in raw throughput metrics and Vulkan, while the T1000 wins in OpenCL, overall average scores, and every practical deployment consideration from power to size to display output.