AMD FirePro W4300 vs AMD Radeon RX 550X Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4300 and AMD Radeon RX 550X are both end-of-life graphics cards from AMD, but they target very different segments of the market. The FirePro W4300 is a professional workstation card built on the older GCN 2.0 architecture, while the RX 550X is a consumer Polaris-generation part. The benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy between the two, with the FirePro taking the lead in the single available compute test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are decisive. The AMD FirePro W4300 scores 11,225 points, while the AMD Radeon RX 550X scores 9,662 points. This gives the FirePro W4300 a 16.2% advantage in raw compute performance, a substantial margin that reflects its professional-grade positioning. The FirePro W4300’s lead is not just a narrow victory; it represents a meaningful performance gap that would translate into faster rendering, simulation, and other compute-heavy workloads.

When examining the broader benchmark context, the FirePro W4300’s average score of 11,225 places it in the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 550X’s average score of 10,481 (derived from its OpenCL and Vulkan results) places it in the 49th percentile. The FirePro’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 with a nearly identical score of 11,228 (a 0% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M at 11,261 (0.3% higher). The RX 550X’s closest competitors are the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 at 10,400 (0.8% lower) and the AMD Radeon R9 M275X at 10,582 (1% higher). These figures show that while the FirePro W4300 sits at the higher end of its performance bracket, the RX 550X is slightly below its immediate rivals, reinforcing the FirePro’s superior standing.

The RX 550X does have one additional benchmark result that the FirePro lacks: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 11,299. This score is actually higher than the FirePro’s OpenCL result, suggesting that the RX 550X’s newer architecture handles Vulkan workloads more efficiently. However, without a comparable Vulkan test for the FirePro W4300, this data point cannot be used for a direct head-to-head comparison. The FirePro W4300 wins the only head-to-head test, taking 1 win versus 0 for the RX 550X.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The FirePro W4300 uses the Bonaire chip based on GCN 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 550X uses the Lexa chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The newer 14 nm process allows the RX 550X to pack 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². The FirePro W4300, by contrast, contains 2,080 million transistors on a larger 160 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 13.0M per mm². This means the RX 550X is more transistor-dense despite its smaller physical size.

The compute configuration differs significantly. The FirePro W4300 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). The RX 550X has fewer shading units (512) and TMUs (32), but retains the same 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer cores, the RX 550X achieves a higher pixel rate of 18.93 GPixel/s compared to the FirePro’s 14.88 GPixel/s, thanks to its higher clock speeds. The RX 550X runs at a base clock of 1100 MHz with a boost clock of 1183 MHz, while the FirePro W4300 has no listed base or boost clocks in the data. The RX 550X’s texture rate of 37.86 GTexel/s is lower than the FirePro’s 44.64 GTexel/s, a direct consequence of its fewer TMUs.

In terms of floating-point performance, the FirePro W4300 delivers 1,428.5 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the RX 550X delivers 1,211.4 GFLOPS. The RX 550X also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with the same 1,211.4 GFLOPS, whereas the FirePro W4300 has no listed FP16 capability. Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with identical 96.00 GB/s bandwidth and 1500 MHz memory clock (6 Gbps effective). The RX 550X uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the FirePro W4300 uses the wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Display outputs also differ: the FirePro W4300 offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 connectors, while the RX 550X provides one DVI, one HDMI 2.0b, and one DisplayPort 1.4a. API support is similar, with both cards supporting DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 550X supports Vulkan 1.3 while the FirePro W4300 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD FirePro W4300 for compute performance. Its 16.2% OpenCL advantage over the RX 550X is the single most important metric in this comparison, and it is backed by a higher peak FP32 throughput and more shading units. The FirePro W4300 is the better choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute power in OpenCL-based workloads. Its 50th percentile ranking versus the RX 550X’s 49th percentile further confirms its slight edge in overall GPU performance. The FirePro W4300 also offers a wider PCIe interface and four display outputs, making it more suitable for multi-display professional setups.

However, the RX 550X is not without merits. Its 14 nm process node and GCN 4.0 architecture represent a newer design, and its Vulkan 1.3 support gives it a software feature advantage. The RX 550X’s higher pixel rate and FP16 support could make it more efficient in certain graphics or compute tasks that leverage those capabilities. Its smaller 145 mm length also makes it more compact, and its dual-slot design with no power connectors suggests easy installation in a wide range of systems. For users running Vulkan-based applications, the RX 550X’s 11,299 Vulkan score indicates strong performance in that API, though it cannot be directly compared to the FirePro’s OpenCL result.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4300 has an average benchmark score of 11,225, while the AMD Radeon RX 550X has an average score of 10,481.

Q: What is the performance difference in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The FirePro W4300 scores 11,225 compared to the RX 550X’s 9,662, giving the FirePro a 16.2% lead.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The FirePro W4300 has 768 shading units, while the RX 550X has 512.

Q: Do both cards support the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

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

A: The FirePro W4300 uses GCN 2.0 on a 28 nm process, while the RX 550X uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The RX 550X has a higher pixel rate of 18.93 GPixel/s compared to the FirePro W4300’s 14.88 GPixel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4300 wins in raw compute power and professional workstation features. Its 1,428.5 GFLOPS FP32 performance is 17.9% higher than the RX 550X’s 1,211.4 GFLOPS. It also has more TMUs (48 vs 32), a higher texture rate (44.64 GTexel/s vs 37.86 GTexel/s), and a wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The FirePro’s four mini-DisplayPort outputs make it ideal for multi-monitor professional environments. Its single-slot design and end-of-life status as a FirePro product position it as a dedicated workstation solution.

The AMD Radeon RX 550X wins in architectural modernity and specific feature areas. Its GCN 4.0 architecture on 14 nm is two generations newer than the FirePro’s GCN 2.0, and its transistor density of 21.4M / mm² is far superior to the FirePro’s 13.0M / mm². The RX 550X offers FP16 compute at 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), a feature absent from the FirePro’s specifications. It also boasts a higher pixel rate (18.93 GPixel/s vs 14.88 GPixel/s), newer display outputs including HDMI 2.0b and DisplayPort 1.4a, and Vulkan 1.3 API support compared to the FirePro’s Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 550X’s shorter 145 mm length and dual-slot cooler make it a more flexible option for compact builds, and its 50 W TDP with no power connectors mirrors the FirePro’s power efficiency while offering a newer feature set. For Vulkan-specific workloads, the RX 550X’s 11,299 Vulkan score demonstrates strong capability, even if it trails in the OpenCL head-to-head.