AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon Pro W5700 Comparison

The AMD FirePro W7100 and AMD Radeon Pro W5700 represent two distinct eras of AMD professional graphics, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear generational leap, with the newer Radeon Pro W5700 dominating the shared benchmark suite, yet the FirePro W7100 still holds a place in the historical record. This analysis breaks down the performance gap, architectural shifts, and practical implications based solely on the provided benchmark scores and specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share only two benchmark tests in the dataset: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 delivers a decisive victory, illustrating the sheer scale of performance improvement between 2014 and 2019.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Radeon Pro W5700 scores 74,613 points. The FirePro W7100 manages 24,182 points. This represents a delta of -67.6% for the older card, meaning the W5700 is roughly three times faster in raw compute throughput. A score of 74,613 places the W5700 in a completely different performance tier, one that the W7100 cannot approach. The gap is not marginal; it is a chasm created by a decade-defining shift in GPU design.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story. The Radeon Pro W5700 posts 70,706 points against the FirePro W7100’s 27,529 points. The delta here is -61.1%, a slightly smaller but still overwhelming advantage for the newer card. Vulkan’s lower-level API overhead allows the W5700’s newer architecture to stretch its legs, while the W7100, built for an older API era, struggles to keep pace. Both results underscore a fundamental truth: the W5700 is not just better; it is in a different league.

The head-to-head win count reflects this dominance. The Radeon Pro W5700 wins 2 out of 2 shared benchmarks. The FirePro W7100 wins 0. While the W7100’s average benchmark score of 25,856 is nearly identical to the W5700’s 25,726, this is a statistical artifact. The W7100’s average is derived from only its two Geekbench scores, while the W5700’s average pulls in additional tests like Passmark and Geekbench Metal, which skew the numbers. In direct competition, there is no contest.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Radeon Pro W5700 in OpenCL compute?

A: The W5700 scores 74,613 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 67.6% higher than the FirePro W7100’s 24,182. This means the W5700 delivers more than triple the compute performance in this workload.

Q: Does the FirePro W7100 win any benchmark against the W5700?

A: No. In the two shared tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the W5700 wins both. The head-to-head benchmark data shows 0 wins for the W7100 and 2 wins for the W5700.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The FirePro W7100 has an average benchmark score of 25,856, while the Radeon Pro W5700 has an average of 25,726. The W7100 is 0.5% higher, but this is misleading because the averages are based on different test sets. In head-to-head tests, the W5700 is far ahead.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: Both cards share the same percentile ranking of 71. This indicates that despite the massive performance gap in the shared benchmarks, both GPUs sit at a similar position relative to the entire database of GPUs, likely due to the W7100’s limited test set.

Q: What is the Radeon Pro W5700’s best single benchmark score?

A: The W5700’s highest score is in Geekbench Metal, where it achieves 89,557 points. This test is not available for the FirePro W7100, highlighting the W5700’s broader API support.

Q: How does the FirePro W7100 compare to its closest rival, the FirePro D700?

A: The FirePro W7100’s average score of 25,856 is 0.1% higher than the AMD FirePro D700’s 25,842. This places the W7100 virtually tied with the D700 in overall performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro W5700 wins every scenario where both cards are tested. Its advantages are most pronounced in compute-heavy workloads like OpenCL and Vulkan, where its newer RDNA architecture and higher raw throughput (8.663 TFLOPS FP32 vs. 3.297 TFLOPS) produce massive score differences. For any modern professional application that leverages GPGPU compute, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the W5700 is the clear choice.

The FirePro W7100’s only “win” is in the context of its own historical period. It was released in August 2014 as a capable workstation card for its time, with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 256-bit bus. Its 3.297 TFLOPS of FP32 performance was respectable for 2014-era workloads. However, against the W5700, it has no practical advantages. The W7100’s lower power draw (150W vs. 205W) and single-slot design are its only physical distinctions, but these are not benchmark wins—they are form-factor considerations.

For users working with legacy software that relies on older APIs like DirectX 12 (12_0) or OpenGL 4.6, the W7100 can still function, but it will do so at a fraction of the W5700’s speed. The W5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it is better equipped for future-proofing. In any shared workload, the W5700 is the winner.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification, reflecting their generational gap. The FirePro W7100 uses 28 nm process technology, while the Radeon Pro W5700 uses 7 nm. This process shrink allows the W5700 to pack 10,300 million transistors into a smaller 251 mm² die, compared to the W7100’s 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die. Transistor density jumps from 13.7M per mm² to 41.0M per mm².

Memory configurations differ significantly. Both cards have 8 GB of memory, but the W7100 uses GDDR5 at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W5700 uses GDDR6 at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), delivering 448.0 GB/s—nearly three times the bandwidth. The core specifications widen the gap: the W7100 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the W5700 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This translates to pixel rates of 29.44 GPixel/s vs. 120.3 GPixel/s and texture rates of 103.0 GTexel/s vs. 270.7 GTexel/s.

The W5700 also offers higher clock speeds, with a base of 1400 MHz and boost of 1880 MHz, whereas the W7100 has no listed base or boost clocks. Power requirements differ, with the W7100 at 150W TDP and the W5700 at 205W TDP. The W5700 requires a 550W suggested PSU and dual-slot cooling, while the W7100 needs only 450W and a single slot. The W5700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the W7100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the W7100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2, while the W5700 has 5x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The FirePro W7100 is built on GCN 3.0 with the Tonga chip, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. GCN 3.0 was AMD’s third-generation Graphics Core Next design, optimized for compute workloads of the mid-2010s. It supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning both operations run at the same 3.297 TFLOPS rate.

The Radeon Pro W5700 uses RDNA 1.0 with the Navi 10 chip, from the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi Series) generation. RDNA is a fundamental redesign, focusing on higher clock speeds and improved instruction efficiency. Its FP16 throughput is 17.33 TFLOPS, which is double its FP32 rate of 8.663 TFLOPS—a 2:1 ratio. This means the W5700 can process half-precision data much faster, a critical feature for machine learning and certain scientific workloads.

The APIs supported also reflect the architectural shift. The W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The W5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer DirectX 12_1 feature level and Vulkan 1.4 provide access to more advanced rendering features and optimizations. The W5700 also supports Geekbench Metal, which the W7100 does not, indicating better macOS compatibility. Both cards lack dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, so neither excels in those specific workloads.

The Verdict

The data leaves no room for ambiguity: the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 is the superior card in every shared benchmark. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,613 is 67.6% higher than the FirePro W7100’s 24,182, and its Vulkan score of 70,706 is 61.1% higher. For any professional workload involving compute, rendering, or modern API support, the W5700 is the only rational choice.

The FirePro W7100 should be selected only by users who have a specific need for its older GCN 3.0 architecture, such as maintaining legacy software compatibility or working with systems that cannot support PCIe 4.0 or dual-slot cards. Its lower 150W TDP and single-slot design make it suitable for compact or power-constrained systems, but these are niche operational constraints, not performance advantages.

The Radeon Pro W5700’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 8.663 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it a far more capable tool for modern professional applications. Its higher power draw and dual-slot footprint are acceptable trade-offs for the massive performance gains. The verdict is straightforward: choose the W5700 for performance, choose the W7100 only for legacy or physical compatibility reasons. The 71st percentile ranking for both cards is a statistical coincidence; head-to-head, the W5700 is the definitive winner.