AMD FirePro W7000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear hierarchy between these two end-of-life workstation and enthusiast cards. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z leads in both benchmark categories, securing 2 wins against 0 for the AMD FirePro W7000. Its average benchmark score of 23,736 places it at the 69th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W7000 averages 19,905 and sits at the 65th percentile.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the GTX TITAN Z is the definitive choice, delivering a 43% higher score in the geekbench_opencl test. Its 5.046 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth provide a substantial advantage for compute-heavy tasks. The FirePro W7000, with 2.432 TFLOPS and 153.6 GB/s, targets a different segment entirely: lower power consumption, a single-slot form factor, and four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs for multi-display professional setups.

The Vulkan results are effectively a tie, with the TITAN Z scoring 22,006 and the FirePro W7000 scoring 22,001, a delta of 0%. This suggests that for Vulkan-based workloads, neither card holds a meaningful edge, and purchasing decisions should be based on other factors such as physical footprint, power requirements, or display output configuration.

The GTX TITAN Z is the pick for users who need maximum FP32 compute and are willing to accommodate a triple-slot, 375 W card with a 750 W suggested power supply. The FirePro W7000 is the pick for users who require a single-slot card with lower power draw (150 W), a 450 W suggested PSU, and native multi-display output via four DisplayPort connectors, accepting significantly lower OpenCL performance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different architectural approaches from their respective manufacturers. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z is built on the GK110B chip using the Kepler architecture, part of the GeForce 700 generation. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million transistors per mm². The AMD FirePro W7000 uses the Pitcairn chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx000) generation. It also uses a 28 nm TSMC process but packs only 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, achieving a higher density of 13.2 million transistors per mm².

The compute resources differ substantially. The GTX TITAN Z features 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The FirePro W7000 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. These figures explain the large gap in pixel rate (52.56 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (210.2 GTexel/s versus 76.00 GTexel/s).

Memory configurations also diverge. The TITAN Z carries 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the W7000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s. The NVIDIA card's memory clock is listed at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), whereas the AMD card runs at 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective).

Clock behavior differs as well. The GTX TITAN Z has a base clock of 705 MHz and a boost clock of 876 MHz. The FirePro W7000 has no base or boost clock listed in the database, indicating a fixed clock design.

Physical and power characteristics are starkly opposed. The TITAN Z is a triple-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 62 mm in width, requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a 750 W suggested PSU. The W7000 is a single-slot card at 242 mm by 111 mm, with no width listed, requiring one 6-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. The TDP figures are 375 W versus 150 W, a 225 W difference.

API support is nearly identical: both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan (1.2.175 for NVIDIA, 1.2.170 for AMD). Display outputs differ, with the TITAN Z offering 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the W7000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16 interfaces.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX TITAN Z wins decisively in OpenCL compute performance. Its score of 25,465 versus 17,808 represents a 43% advantage, the largest margin in the head-to-head comparison. This is consistent with its higher FP32 throughput (5.046 TFLOPS), larger memory bandwidth (336.0 GB/s), and greater shading unit count. For applications that leverage OpenCL for general-purpose GPU computing, such as scientific simulation, financial modeling, or video encoding, the TITAN Z is the superior choice.

The Vulkan category shows no meaningful winner. The TITAN Z scores 22,006 and the W7000 scores 22,001, a delta of 0%. Benchmark results indicate these cards perform identically in Vulkan workloads despite their architectural differences. This near-exact parity suggests that Vulkan performance is not a differentiating factor between these two products.

The FirePro W7000 does not win any benchmark category, but its strengths lie outside raw performance. Its single-slot form factor and 150 W TDP make it suitable for dense multi-GPU configurations or systems with limited space. The four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs allow direct connection of up to four displays without adapters, a feature the TITAN Z cannot match with its single DisplayPort and two DVI outputs. The lower suggested PSU of 450 W also makes it compatible with a wider range of power supplies.

The average benchmark scores place each card near different rival sets. The TITAN Z sits between the AMD Radeon RX 9070 (23,877, 0.6% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile (23,628, 0.5% lower), with the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile at 23,518 (0.9% lower) and the RX 6800S at 24,063 (1.4% higher). The W7000 is positioned between the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885, 0.1% lower) and the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765, 0.7% lower), with the AMD FirePro D300 at 19,637 (1.4% lower) and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 at 19,602 (1.5% lower). These rival deltas confirm that the TITAN Z competes in a higher performance tier than the W7000.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z scores 25,465 in geekbench_opencl, which is 43% higher than the AMD FirePro W7000's score of 17,808.

Q: Do these cards perform differently in Vulkan workloads?

A: No. The GTX TITAN Z scores 22,006 and the FirePro W7000 scores 22,001, resulting in a delta of 0%. Vulkan performance is effectively identical.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The GTX TITAN Z has a TDP of 375 W and requires a 750 W suggested PSU with two 8-pin connectors. The FirePro W7000 has a TDP of 150 W, a 450 W suggested PSU, and requires one 6-pin connector.

Q: How do the memory specifications compare?

A: The GTX TITAN Z has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 336.0 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 more display outputs?

A: The AMD FirePro W7000 supports four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z supports two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2 output.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The GTX TITAN Z is a triple-slot card measuring 267 mm by 111 mm by 62 mm. The FirePro W7000 is a single-slot card measuring 242 mm by 111 mm, with no width listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The geekbench_opencl test produces the most significant divergence between the two cards. The GTX TITAN Z records 25,465 points, while the FirePro W7000 records 17,808 points. This 43% delta is the largest in the comparison and aligns with the underlying hardware disparities. The TITAN Z's 2,880 shading units process nearly double the shader workload of the W7000's 1,280 units. Its texture rate of 210.2 GTexel/s is almost three times the W7000's 76.00 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s further amplifies the gap in memory-bound OpenCL kernels.

The geekbench_vulkan test shows a dramatically different picture. The TITAN Z scores 22,006, and the W7000 scores 22,001, a delta of 0%. This near-perfect parity suggests that Vulkan workloads in the benchmark suite are not sensitive to the architectural differences between Kepler and GCN 1.0. Neither card's advantages in shading units, texture units, or memory bandwidth translate into Vulkan performance gains in this particular test.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the TITAN Z's average of 23,736 is 19.2% higher than the W7000's average of 19,905. The percentile rankings reinforce this gap: the TITAN Z sits at the 69th percentile of all GPUs, while the W7000 sits at the 65th percentile.

The nearest rival comparisons provide additional context for each card's position. The TITAN Z is within 1.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 6800S (24,063) and within 0.9% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile (23,518). The W7000 is within 1.5% of the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602) and within 0.1% of the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885). These groupings confirm that the TITAN Z operates in a performance class roughly 19% above the W7000's class.

The head-to-head record stands at 2 wins for the GTX TITAN Z and 0 wins for the FirePro W7000. One win is by a wide margin (43% in OpenCL), and one is by a razor-thin margin (0% in Vulkan). This pattern indicates that the TITAN Z is the stronger overall performer, but the W7000 remains competitive in specific API environments. For users whose workloads rely primarily on Vulkan, the choice between these cards should be made on secondary factors like power draw, slot width, and display connectivity rather than benchmark scores.