AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT and AMD FirePro W7100 represent two very different eras of AMD graphics, and the benchmark data reflects a generational chasm rather than a close contest. The RX 6700 XT, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, holds a decisive lead in every measurable category, while the FirePro W7100, a GCN 3.0 workstation card from 2014, lags significantly. The data shows a 2-0 win tally in head-to-head benchmarks, with the RX 6700 XT dominating in both compute and graphics API tests. This analysis breaks down the specific deltas, architectural differences, and use-case implications based solely on the provided fact pack.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between these two GPUs is limited to two benchmark tests, but the results are stark and unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700 XT scores 44,152, while the FirePro W7100 manages only 24,182. This represents an 82.6% advantage for the RX 6700 XT, a massive gap that underscores the compute throughput difference between a modern 7nm part and a 28nm legacy design. The OpenCL result is particularly telling because it reflects raw parallel processing capability, where the RX 6700 XT's 2,560 shading units and 13.21 TFLOPS FP32 performance dwarf the FirePro's 1,792 shading units and 3.297 TFLOPS.

The Vulkan result is even more lopsided. The RX 6700 XT posts a score of 93,500, compared to the FirePro W7100's 27,529. That is a 239.6% delta, meaning the RX 6700 XT is more than three times faster in this API. Vulkan is a low-overhead, modern graphics API, and the RX 6700 XT's support for Vulkan 1.4 versus the FirePro's older Vulkan 1.2.170 implementation explains part of the gap, but the sheer compute and memory bandwidth advantage is the primary driver. The RX 6700 XT's 384.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the FirePro's 160.0 GB/s is a 140% increase, which directly impacts geometry throughput and texture streaming in Vulkan workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the RX 6700 XT's average benchmark score is 27,425 across 11 tests, while the FirePro W7100 averages 25,856 across just 2 tests. The RX 6700 XT's percentile rank among all GPUs is 72, versus 71 for the FirePro W7100, but this near-parity in percentile is misleading; the RX 6700 XT sits in a far more competitive field of modern cards. The nearest rivals for the RX 6700 XT include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (avg score 27,435, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (avg score 27,565, -0.5% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (avg score 27,839, -1.5% delta). This places the RX 6700 XT in the upper echelon of desktop-class performance, within 1.5% of an RTX 3090 in average score.

The FirePro W7100's nearest rivals are far older or lower-tier parts. Its closest competitor is the AMD FirePro D700 (avg score 25,842, 0.1% delta), followed by the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (avg score 25,891, -0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (avg score 25,740, 0.5% delta). Notably, the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile is a laptop part, and the FirePro W7100 is within 0.5% of it, which highlights how far the workstation card has fallen relative to even mobile gaming hardware. The data clearly shows that the RX 6700 XT is not just faster—it is in a completely different performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 27,425, while the AMD FirePro W7100 averages 25,856. The RX 6700 XT leads by 1,569 points, or roughly 6.1%.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest delta is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 6700 XT scores 93,500 versus the FirePro W7100's 27,529, a 239.6% advantage. This is the single most decisive metric in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How does the FirePro W7100 compare to its own nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W7100 is essentially tied with the AMD FirePro D700 (0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (-0.1% delta). It is 0.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile and 0.5% slower than the AMD Radeon Pro W5700.

Q: Does the RX 6700 XT outperform an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090?

A: No. Based on average benchmark scores, the RTX 3090 scores 27,565, which is 0.5% higher than the RX 6700 XT's 27,425. The RX 6700 XT trails by a narrow margin, but the two are effectively in the same performance tier.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 6700 XT has a memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s, while the FirePro W7100 offers 160.0 GB/s. The RX 6700 XT provides 224 GB/s more bandwidth, a 140% increase. This is a critical factor in high-resolution texture loading and compute-heavy tasks.

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

A: The RX 6700 XT ranks in the 72nd percentile, while the FirePro W7100 ranks in the 71st percentile. Despite the RX 6700 XT's clear performance lead, the percentile difference is only 1 point, reflecting the FirePro's relatively high standing among older GPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6700 XT wins in every scenario where modern graphics APIs or raw compute throughput matter. Its Vulkan score of 93,500 is more than triple the FirePro's, making it the clear choice for Vulkan-based game engines, compute shaders, and any workload that leverages the low-overhead API. The OpenCL advantage of 82.6% further cements its position for general-purpose GPU compute, including physics simulations, video encoding, and machine learning inference. The RX 6700 XT also benefits from a 12 GB GDDR6 memory pool with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is essential for 4K texture sets, large dataset processing, and multi-tasking between graphics and compute workloads. Its 40 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support make it future-proof for modern game titles that use ray-traced effects, a feature the FirePro entirely lacks.

The FirePro W7100's wins are limited to niche workstation scenarios that favor its specific design. It is a single-slot card, whereas the RX 6700 XT is dual-slot, so in dense multi-GPU server configurations or compact chassis where space is at a premium, the FirePro's form factor is an advantage. It also offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, compared to the RX 6700 XT's single HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, which could be beneficial for multi-monitor professional setups that require more than three simultaneous displays without using daisy-chaining. The FirePro's lower TDP of 150 W versus the RX 6700 XT's 230 W also means it generates less heat and can be used in systems with a 450 W suggested PSU, whereas the RX 6700 XT requires a 550 W PSU. However, these are physical and power advantages, not performance ones—the data shows the FirePro W7100 wins zero benchmark tests.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification, reflecting their distinct generations and market positions. The RX 6700 XT uses a 7 nm process node, while the FirePro W7100 is built on 28 nm. The RX 6700 XT packs 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, whereas the FirePro W7100 has 5,000 million transistors on a larger 366 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 51.3M per mm² for the RX 6700 XT versus 13.7M per mm² for the FirePro, a 3.7x difference in integration efficiency.

The memory subsystems are entirely different. The RX 6700 XT uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with only 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700 XT's clock speeds are significantly higher: its base clock is 2321 MHz, boost clock is 2581 MHz, and game clock is 2424 MHz. The FirePro W7100 has no base, boost, or game clock listed in the data, but its memory clock is 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), compared to the RX 6700 XT's 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The RX 6700 XT also has more shading units (2,560 vs 1,792), more texture mapping units (160 vs 112), and double the ROPs (64 vs 32). The pixel rate is 165.2 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 413.0 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is 13.21 TFLOPS versus 3.297 TFLOPS, and the FP16 output is 26.43 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical dimensions also diverge. The RX 6700 XT has a TDP of 230 W and requires both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector, while the FirePro W7100 has a 150 W TDP and uses a single 6-pin connector. The RX 6700 XT is 267 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, while the FirePro W7100 is 241 mm long and 111 mm tall, with no width listed. The RX 6700 XT uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the FirePro W7100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is fundamental. The RX 6700 XT is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 7 nm process. It is part of the Navi II generation (RX 6000 series) and uses the Navi 22 chip. The FirePro W7100, in contrast, is based on the GCN 3.0 architecture, also made by TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It uses the Tonga chip and belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. These are not incremental updates—RDNA 2.0 is a ground-up redesign of AMD's GPU compute model, optimized for gaming and modern workloads, while GCN 3.0 is an older compute-centric design.

The RX 6700 XT features 40 ray tracing cores, which the FirePro W7100 entirely lacks. This enables hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature that is now standard in modern game engines and 3D rendering applications. The RX 6700 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, while the FirePro W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.2.170, and OpenGL 4.6. The newer DirectX 12_2 feature set includes mesh shaders, variable-rate shading, and sampler feedback, all of which are absent on the FirePro. The RX 6700 XT's memory is GDDR6 with 16 Gbps effective speed, while the FirePro uses GDDR5 at 5 Gbps effective, representing a 3.2x memory clock advantage.

The FP16 compute capability is another major architectural differentiator. The RX 6700 XT delivers 26.43 TFLOPS FP16 via a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can double its FP32 throughput when using half-precision data. The FirePro W7100 offers only 3.297 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it has no FP16 acceleration. This is critical for AI inference, neural network training, and certain scientific workloads that benefit from half-precision arithmetic. The RX 6700 XT's transistor density of 51.3M per mm² versus 13.7M per mm² for the FirePro further illustrates the architectural leap: the newer chip packs 3.7x more transistors per square millimeter, enabling more complex execution units and advanced features like the ray accelerators. The FirePro W7100 was released in 2014, while the RX 6700 XT launched in 2021, and the data shows exactly what seven years of GPU architecture evolution delivers.