AMD FirePro W600 vs AMD Radeon HD 8690M Comparison

The AMD FirePro W600 and the AMD Radeon HD 8690M are both built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm process node, yet they target entirely different segments of the GPU market. The FirePro W600 is a workstation-focused card designed for multi-display professional use, while the HD 8690M is a mobile chip intended for laptops. Despite their different roles, the benchmark data shows they land remarkably close in raw compute performance, with the desktop part edging ahead by a narrow margin. This pairing offers a curious case study in how architecture scales across form factors and power envelopes.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results are decisive in one sense: the AMD FirePro W600 wins the only test recorded, the Geekbench OpenCL score, with a delta of 1.4% over the Radeon HD 8690M. That gives the FirePro W600 a clean sweep with 1 win and 0 losses. However, the margin is so thin that the practical implications are minimal for raw compute tasks. The FirePro W600’s advantage here is its wider memory bus and higher bandwidth, which likely helps in memory-bound workloads, though the data only shows a single aggregated score.

Where the FirePro W600 truly distinguishes itself is in its feature set for professional environments. It offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, a capability that the Radeon HD 8690M lacks entirely, as its display output configuration is not listed. This makes the W600 the clear choice for multi-monitor setups, such as financial trading floors or video wall installations. The Radeon HD 8690M, by contrast, has no listed display outputs, suggesting it was designed to be paired with a laptop’s integrated display or external ports handled by the system manufacturer, not as a standalone multi-display solution.

For pure compute performance, the data suggests the two are nearly interchangeable. The FirePro W600 scores 6223, while the HD 8690M scores 6137, a difference of only 86 points. Both GPUs sit at the 36th percentile among all GPUs, meaning neither is a top-tier compute part. The Radeon HD 8690M does have a higher base clock of 925 MHz and boost clock of 975 MHz, which helps it close the gap despite having fewer shading units, texture mapping units, and raster output units. The FirePro W600’s advantage comes from having 512 shading units versus 320, 32 TMUs versus 20, and 16 ROPs versus 8, giving it higher theoretical pixel and texture rates.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the Graphics Core Next 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, which means they share the same fundamental instruction set and feature support. They both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, so software compatibility is identical. The key differences lie in their physical implementation and target use cases.

The FirePro W600 uses the Cape Verde chip, which is a larger die at 123 mm² with 1,500 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². The Radeon HD 8690M uses the Sun chip, which is a much smaller die at 56 mm² with 690 million transistors, giving a nearly identical transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². This near-identical density indicates that both chips are using the same manufacturing process efficiently, but the Cape Verde chip packs more than twice the transistor count, enabling its higher core configuration.

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The FirePro W600 has a 128-bit memory bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon HD 8690M has a 64-bit bus, also with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, but only reaches 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. Both run the memory at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective speed, so the bandwidth difference is entirely due to the bus width. This is a critical architectural divergence, as memory bandwidth often becomes the limiting factor in compute workloads, especially those that stream large datasets.

The FirePro W600 is a desktop card requiring a 250 W suggested power supply, has a 75 W TDP, and is a single-slot design measuring 168 mm in length. It draws power from the PCIe slot. The Radeon HD 8690M is a mobile chip with no listed TDP, slot width, power connectors, or dimensions, reflecting its design for soldered laptop integration. The FirePro W600 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the HD 8690M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which halves the potential data transfer bandwidth between the GPU and the host system.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, which measures compute performance across a variety of workloads. The AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137. This gives the FirePro W600 a 1.4% victory, a margin that falls within the noise of typical benchmark variance. To contextualize this, the FirePro W600’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 6950, which scores 6210, meaning the W600 is 0.2% faster than that older desktop card. It is also 0.7% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, both of which score 6270, and 0.9% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282.

The Radeon HD 8690M’s nearest rivals paint a similar picture of mid-range performance. It is 0.3% faster than the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117), 1% faster than both the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078) and NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077), and 1.2% slower than the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210). The fact that both chips land within a 1-2% band of the same rival cards underscores how close they are in raw compute throughput, despite their architectural differences.

The FirePro W600’s wins in this benchmark likely stem from its higher shading unit count and doubled memory bandwidth. The HD 8690M compensates with higher clocks, but the extra 192 shading units in the W600 provide a clear compute advantage in parallel workloads. The texture rate also favors the W600 at 24.00 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s, and pixel rate is 12.00 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s. These are theoretical peaks, but they align with the OpenCL score direction.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. The AMD FirePro W600 is the superior choice for any scenario requiring multiple display outputs, as its six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 connections are a unique feature that the Radeon HD 8690M does not offer. It also holds a slight performance edge in compute benchmarks, with a 1.4% higher Geekbench OpenCL score, and offers double the memory bandwidth at 64.00 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s. Its larger die and higher transistor count suggest it was built for sustained professional workloads, though the benchmark data does not explicitly confirm thermal or longevity characteristics.

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M is the only option for mobile platforms. Its lack of a listed TDP, dimensions, and power connectors confirms its role as a laptop component. For users, the choice is not really between these two GPUs but between desktop and mobile form factors. If a system requires a discrete GPU in a laptop, the HD 8690M is the data-backed choice. For a desktop professional workstation where multi-display output is critical, the FirePro W600 is the clear winner.

Neither card is a performance champion. Both sit at the 36th percentile among all GPUs, and their closest rivals include older cards like the AMD Radeon HD 6950 and low-end modern parts like the NVIDIA GeForce MX230. The FirePro W600’s launch MSRP of 599 USD reflects its professional positioning, but this page does not compare pricing. The data suggests that for pure compute, users would find no meaningful difference between these two, so the decision hinges entirely on form factor and display connectivity requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223, which is 1.4% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8690M’s score of 6137.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both the AMD FirePro W600 and the AMD Radeon HD 8690M support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The FirePro W600 has a 128-bit bus and delivers 64.00 GB/s, while the HD 8690M has a 64-bit bus and delivers 32.00 GB/s. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 memory at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective speed.

Q: What is the difference in shading units?

A: The FirePro W600 has 512 shading units, while the Radeon HD 8690M has 320 shading units. The FirePro W600 also has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs, versus 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs on the HD 8690M.

Q: Which GPU offers more display outputs?

A: The FirePro W600 offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Radeon HD 8690M has no display outputs listed, indicating it relies on the host laptop’s video outputs.

Q: Are both GPUs built on the same process node?

A: Yes, both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process and use the GCN 1.0 architecture. The FirePro W600’s Cape Verde chip is 123 mm² with 1,500 million transistors, while the HD 8690M’s Sun chip is 56 mm² with 690 million transistors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W600 | AMD Radeon HD 8690M |

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

| Chip | Cape Verde | Sun |

| Generation | FirePro GCN (Wx000) | Solar System (HD 8600M) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 925 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 975 MHz |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 32.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 320 |

| TMUs | 32 | 20 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.00 GPixel/s | 7.800 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.00 GTexel/s | 19.50 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 768.0 GFLOPS | 624.0 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Not listed |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 | Not listed |

| Dimensions | 168 mm (6.6 inches) length, 111 mm (4.4 inches) height, 20 mm (0.8 inches) width | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2012-06-12 | 2013-02-28 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | London |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Polaris | Gem System |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | Not listed |