AMD FirePro W7000 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800S Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 6800S vs AMD FirePro W7000

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800S posts an average benchmark score of 24063, while the AMD FirePro W7000 records 19905. That places the RX 6800S at the 69th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 65th percentile for the FirePro W7000.

Q: What is the largest observed performance gap between the two cards?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6800S scores 73202 against the FirePro W7000's 17808, a delta of 311.1%. The second head-to-head test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows the RX 6800S at 81272 versus 22001, a 269.4% advantage.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor density, and what does that imply?

A: The RX 6800S packs 46.7 million transistors per mm² on a 7 nm process, while the FirePro W7000 achieves 13.2 million per mm² on 28 nm. The RX 6800S uses 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die; the FirePro W7000 uses 2,800 million on 212 mm².

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The RX 6800S has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W7000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing hardware?

A: Only the RX 6800S includes 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. The FirePro W7000 has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 6800S has a TDP of 100 W and uses no power connectors. The FirePro W7000 has a TDP of 150 W, requires a single 6-pin connector, and the database lists a suggested PSU of 450 W.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the AMD Radeon RX 6800S for any workload where raw compute or modern API performance matters. In the two directly comparable benchmarks, the RX 6800S leads by 311.1% in OpenCL and 269.4% in Vulkan. The average benchmark score reinforces this: 24063 versus 19905, a gap of roughly 21%. The RX 6800S also sits higher in the overall GPU percentile ranking (69th versus 65th), meaning it outperforms a larger share of the database.

The FirePro W7000 is not without arguments. It offers a single-slot form factor, four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, and a 256-bit memory bus, which historically serves multi-display workstation setups. Its launch MSRP was 899 USD. However, its only two recorded benchmarks are Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, and it loses both by wide margins. The RX 6800S is end-of-life, but so is the FirePro W7000. For compute performance, the choice is clear: the RX 6800S wins both head-to-head tests and holds a higher average score. The FirePro W7000 only makes sense if the specific need is its display output configuration or its older PCIe 3.0 x16 interface in a legacy system.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database includes exactly two shared tests between these cards. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6800S scores 73202 versus 17808 for the FirePro W7000. That is a 311.1% lead, meaning the RX 6800S delivers more than four times the raw compute throughput in this API. The gap is not marginal; it is a generational leap in parallel processing capability.

Geekbench Vulkan shows a similar story. The RX 6800S reaches 81272, while the FirePro W7000 manages 22001. The delta is 269.4%. Vulkan is a modern low-level API, and the RX 6800S's RDNA 2.0 architecture with 2048 shading units simply scales far better than the FirePro W7000's GCN 1.0 design with 1280 shading units.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the RX 6800S has a much richer record: 11 benchmark entries ranging from PassMark DirectX 9 (200) to Geekbench Metal (85256). The FirePro W7000 only has two entries. In the RX 6800S's own results, its strongest showings are in Geekbench Metal (85256) and Vulkan (81272), with PassMark G3D at 15908. The FirePro W7000's best recorded score is its Vulkan result of 22001, which is still far below the RX 6800S's OpenCL score of 73202.

The win count is 2 for the RX 6800S and 0 for the FirePro W7000. There is no shared test where the FirePro W7000 comes out ahead. The nearest rivals for each card provide additional context: the RX 6800S sits within 0.9% of cards like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24277) and GTX 780 Ti (24236), while the FirePro W7000 is within 1.5% of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602) and AMD FirePro D300 (19637). These rival clusters show that the RX 6800S competes in a higher performance tier overall.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply across nearly every specification. The RX 6800S uses a 7 nm process; the FirePro W7000 uses 28 nm. Transistor count differs by a factor of four: 11,060 million versus 2,800 million. Die size is similar (237 mm² versus 212 mm²), but the transistor density tells the real story: 46.7 million per mm² versus 13.2 million per mm².

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The RX 6800S has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W7000 has 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6800S achieves higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus due to faster memory clocks (2000 MHz versus 1200 MHz, 16 Gbps effective versus 4.8 Gbps effective).

Compute resources also differ. The RX 6800S has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The FirePro W7000 has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6800S includes 32 ray tracing cores; the FirePro W7000 has none. Pixel rate for the RX 6800S is 134.4 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s for the FirePro. Texture rate is 268.8 GTexel/s versus 76.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 8.602 TFLOPS versus 2.432 TFLOPS. The RX 6800S also lists FP16 at 17.20 TFLOPS (2:1), while the FirePro W7000 has no FP16 data.

Power and physical specs are opposites. The RX 6800S is an integrated/form-factor "IGP" with no power connectors and a 100 W TDP. The FirePro W7000 is a single-slot card measuring 242 mm in length, 111 mm in height, requiring one 6-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU, with a 150 W TDP. The RX 6800S uses PCIe 4.0 x8; the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs: the RX 6800S is "portable device dependent," while the FirePro W7000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2.

Architecture Differences

The RX 6800S is built on RDNA 2.0 with the Navi 23 chip, part of the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation. The FirePro W7000 uses GCN 1.0 with the Pitcairn chip, from the FirePro GCN (Wx000) generation. These are two distinct architectural eras. RDNA 2.0 is a modern gaming-oriented design with explicit ray tracing support, visible in its 32 RT cores. GCN 1.0 predates ray tracing entirely and was AMD's first unified-shader architecture for professional work.

The process node difference is stark: 7 nm TSMC for the RX 6800S versus 28 nm TSMC for the FirePro. This explains the transistor density gap. The RX 6800S fits 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die; the FirePro fits 2,800 million into 212 mm². The RX 6800S's RDNA 2.0 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro W7000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.2.170, and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 6800S has a newer feature set, including hardware ray tracing and higher Vulkan API support.

The FirePro W7000's predecessor is FirePro Terascale, and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris. The RX 6800S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile. Neither card has a successor listed in the database. Both are marked as end-of-life. The RX 6800S was released on 2022-01-03; the FirePro W7000 on 2012-06-12, a gap of nearly a decade. That decade explains the architectural and performance chasm.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6800S wins every recorded shared benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 311.1%. In Geekbench Vulkan, it leads by 269.4%. Its average benchmark score is 24063, which is 4158 points higher than the FirePro W7000's 19905. The RX 6800S is also better positioned in the overall percentile ranking: 69th versus 65th. For any compute-heavy task, from OpenCL rendering to Vulkan-based applications, the RX 6800S is the clear choice.

The RX 6800S also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 8 GB GDDR6 with 256.0 GB/s is double the capacity and 67% more bandwidth than the FirePro's 4 GB GDDR5 at 153.6 GB/s. For large datasets or high-resolution textures, that matters. The RX 6800S's higher pixel rate (134.4 GPixel/s vs 30.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (268.8 GTexel/s vs 76.00 GTexel/s) make it superior for any rasterization workload. Its FP32 performance of 8.602 TFLOPS is more than 3.5 times the FirePro's 2.432 TFLOPS.

The FirePro W7000 has no benchmark wins. Its only advantages are structural: a single-slot physical design, four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, a 256-bit memory bus, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. These features suit a specific workstation scenario, such as driving multiple monitors from a single slim card in an older system. The FirePro also has a lower TDP of 150 W, but that is still higher than the RX 6800S's 100 W. The FirePro's launch MSRP was 899 USD, but the RX 6800S has no listed MSRP, so no price comparison is possible from the data.

In practical terms, the RX 6800S is for anyone needing modern compute performance, ray tracing, or high-bandwidth memory. The FirePro W7000 is for legacy multi-display professional setups where the form factor and output count matter more than raw speed. The benchmark data gives no scenario where the FirePro W7000 outperforms the RX 6800S in shared tests. The RX 6800S wins both head-to-head metrics, holds a higher average score, and sits in a higher percentile. The FirePro W7000's only niche is its specific physical and display capabilities, which the database confirms but does not quantify in benchmark terms.