AMD FirePro W4300 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 and AMD FirePro W4300 occupy vastly different corners of the GPU landscape, and the benchmark data quantifies that gap with brutal clarity. The single shared data point, the Geekbench OpenCL test, tells the entire story of their performance relationship. In that test, the GTX 1080 scores 51,204, while the FirePro W4300 manages only 11,225. That is a 356.2% delta in favor of the NVIDIA card, meaning the GTX 1080 delivers more than four and a half times the raw compute throughput of the AMD workstation part in this particular workload. The head-to-head tally is a clean sweep: one win for NVIDIA, zero for AMD. There is no benchmark in the dataset where the FirePro W4300 pulls ahead, so the analysis is not about which card wins specific tests, but rather about how decisively the GTX 1080 dominates and what that means for the distinct use cases each card was designed to serve. The FirePro’s single benchmark score of 11,225 places it in the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 1080’s average score of 11,960 places it in the 51st percentile, yet this apparent similarity is misleading; the average for the GTX 1080 is dragged down by its inclusion of older DirectX 9 and 10 tests, while its OpenCL score shows the true chasm between them.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is not close. NVIDIA’s GTX 1080 produces a score of 51,204, which is 356.2% higher than the FirePro W4300’s 11,225. This is not a marginal victory or a case where architectural quirks favor one vendor; it is a categorical demolition. For context, the GTX 1080’s nearest rivals in the overall database — the GTX 960A, RX 6500 XT, GTX 1660, and RX 7800 XT — all have average scores between 11,627 and 11,998, with deltas ranging from -0.3% to 2.9% from the GTX 1080’s 11,960 average. The FirePro W4300’s nearest rivals, such as the Radeon Pro WX 3200 and GTX 780M, cluster tightly around its 11,225 average, with deltas of 0% and -0.3% respectively. This means the GTX 1080’s OpenCL score of 51,204 is roughly 4.3 times higher than its own average benchmark score, while the FirePro’s sole score of 11,225 is exactly its average. The implication is stark: the GTX 1080 is a compute monster in OpenCL, while the FirePro is a modest performer that happens to sit in a similar percentile bracket only because the GTX 1080’s average is diluted by legacy DirectX tests. In the PassMark G3D test, the GTX 1080 scores 15,586, and in PassMark GPU Compute it scores 7,614, but no comparable FirePro numbers exist in the pack — so the OpenCL result must carry the weight of the comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different silicon from different eras. The GTX 1080 uses the GP104 chip on NVIDIA’s Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors into a die size of 314 mm², yielding a transistor density of 22.9 million per square millimeter. The FirePro W4300, by contrast, uses the Bonaire chip on AMD’s GCN 2.0 architecture, built on an older 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains just 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, with a density of 13.0 million per square millimeter. The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap: the 16 nm node allows nearly twice the transistor density, enabling the GTX 1080 to field 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The FirePro W4300 is limited to 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and just 16 ROPs. That is a 3.3x advantage in shading units and a 4x advantage in ROPs for NVIDIA. Clock speeds also differ dramatically. The GTX 1080 runs at a base clock of 1607 MHz and boosts to 1733 MHz, while the FirePro W4300 has no listed base or boost clocks in the data — only a memory clock of 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The GTX 1080’s memory runs at 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective), and it uses GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus for 320.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro uses GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding just 96.00 GB/s — a 3.3x bandwidth deficit. Both cards support PCIe 3.0 x16, but the GTX 1080 has a TDP of 180 W versus the FirePro’s 50 W, reflecting the massive difference in compute resources.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 wins every benchmark it shares with the AMD FirePro W4300, and it wins by a margin that borders on absurd. The 356.2% delta in OpenCL means the GTX 1080 is not just faster; it is in a different performance class entirely. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute — whether that is rendering, simulation, or data processing — the GTX 1080 is the only rational choice based on raw performance. The FirePro W4300’s sole benchmark score of 11,225 is 78% lower than the GTX 1080’s OpenCL score, and its nearest rivals in the database (all with averages around 11,200) confirm that it is a low-end part. The GTX 1080’s average benchmark score of 11,960 is deceptive because it is pulled down by weak results in legacy DirectX tests (e.g., 93 in PassMark DirectX 10, 55 in DirectX 12, but 211 in DirectX 9). Its real strength lies in modern APIs and compute, as evidenced by its Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,398 and Metal score of 23,824. The FirePro W4300, with no Vulkan or Metal scores listed, cannot compete in those arenas. However, the verdict is not solely about performance. The FirePro W4300 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a 50 W TDP, while the GTX 1080 is a dual-slot card requiring a single 8-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. For space-constrained or power-limited systems, the FirePro’s physical footprint is an advantage. But if performance is the metric, the GTX 1080 wins outright.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every specification. The GTX 1080 has 8 GB of GDDR5X memory, while the FirePro W4300 has 4 GB of GDDR5. The GTX 1080’s memory bus is 256-bit versus 128-bit, and its bandwidth is 320.3 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s. Shading units: 2,560 versus 768. TMUs: 160 versus 48. ROPs: 64 versus 16. Pixel rate: 110.9 GPixel/s versus 14.88 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 277.3 GTexel/s versus 44.64 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 8.873 TFLOPS versus 1,428.5 GFLOPS (which is 1.43 TFLOPS). The GTX 1080 has a boost clock of 1733 MHz; the FirePro has no boost clock listed. Process node: 16 nm versus 28 nm. Transistors: 7,200 million versus 2,080 million. Die size: 314 mm² versus 160 mm². TDP: 180 W versus 50 W. Slot width: dual-slot versus single-slot. Power connectors: 1x 8-pin versus none. Suggested PSU: 450 W versus 250 W. Display outputs: the GTX 1080 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a; the FirePro has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 1080 supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4; the FirePro supports DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.2.170. Physical dimensions: the GTX 1080 is 267 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 40 mm wide; the FirePro is 171 mm long and 69 mm tall, with no width listed. The GTX 1080 was released on 2016-05-26; the FirePro on 2015-11-30. The GTX 1080 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD; the FirePro has no launch MSRP listed. The GTX 1080 also offers FP16 performance of 138.6 GFLOPS (1:64), while the FirePro has no FP16 data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 scores 51,204 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 356.2% higher than the AMD FirePro W4300’s 11,225.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1080 provides 320.3 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, while the FirePro W4300 provides 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 1080 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the FirePro W4300 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), a slightly lower feature level.

Q: How much more power does the GTX 1080 consume?

A: The GTX 1080 has a TDP of 180 W, compared to the FirePro W4300’s 50 W. The GTX 1080 also requires a 450 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro only needs 250 W.

Q: Which card is physically smaller?

A: The FirePro W4300 is a single-slot card measuring 171 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the GTX 1080 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The GTX 1080 contains 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die, while the FirePro W4300 contains 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 wins in every measurable performance category from the data. It is the clear choice for any application that demands high FP32 throughput, such as compute-heavy rendering, deep learning inference (though it lacks tensor cores), or high-resolution gaming. Its 8 GB of GDDR5X memory and 320.3 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large textures and data sets. The GTX 1080’s higher pixel rate of 110.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 277.3 GTexel/s mean it can drive high refresh rate displays and complex scenes without bottlenecking. Its support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12_1 ensures compatibility with the latest APIs. The GTX 1080’s nearest rivals in the database — such as the GTX 1660 (2.4% lower average score) and RX 7800 XT (2.9% lower) — are all close in average, but none of them touch its OpenCL peak of 51,204.

The AMD FirePro W4300 wins on physical and power efficiency. It is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a 50 W TDP, and a 250 W suggested PSU, making it ideal for compact workstations or systems with limited power delivery. Its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs are suited for multi-monitor setups in professional environments, though they are an older standard than the GTX 1080’s DisplayPort 1.4a. The FirePro’s nearest rivals, like the Radeon Pro WX 3200 (0% delta) and GTX 780M (-0.3% delta), show that it is competitive within its own low-power niche. The FirePro also has a smaller physical footprint at 171 mm versus 267 mm, which may matter in tight chassis. However, the data shows no benchmark where the FirePro outperforms the GTX 1080, so its wins are exclusively in the realms of power draw, size, and thermal footprint — not performance. For users who prioritize compute speed above all else, the GTX 1080 is the only option. For users who need a low-profile, low-power card for basic display output or light compute, the FirePro W4300 has merit, but it cannot match the GTX 1080’s capabilities.