AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6700M Comparison

The AMD FirePro W7100 and AMD Radeon RX 6700M occupy the same percentile ranking (71st) among all GPUs, but their average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The FirePro W7100 averages 25,856 points, edging out the RX 6700M’s 25,633 average by roughly 0.9%. However, the head-to-head benchmark data reveals a stark performance reversal: the RX 6700M wins both shared tests by overwhelming margins. This pairing illustrates how generational architectural leaps can produce near-identical aggregate scores while completely reshaping individual workload strengths.

The Verdict

Strictly from the data, the AMD Radeon RX 6700M is the clear performance winner in every directly comparable benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700M scores 77,666 against the FirePro W7100’s 24,182, a difference of 68.9% in favor of the newer card. The Vulkan gap is even wider: 90,816 versus 27,529, a 69.7% advantage. For any workload using OpenCL or Vulkan, the RX 6700M is categorically superior. The FirePro W7100’s only statistical edge is its average benchmark score (25,856 versus 25,633) and its position as the higher-performing card in the nearestRivals list — but that aggregate figure is skewed by the fact that the two share only two benchmark tests, while the RX 6700M has nine additional tests (3DMark, PassMark variants) that pull its average down.

The FirePro W7100 is the choice for legacy professional environments requiring specific features: it offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, a single-slot form factor, and a 6-pin power connector — all absent from the RX 6700M, which is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no dedicated power connectors and portable-device-dependent outputs. The RX 6700M is the choice for raw compute performance, particularly in Vulkan and OpenCL, and for modern API support. It carries DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the W7100’s DirectX 12 (12_0), and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is defined by process node and compute design. The FirePro W7100 uses the Tonga chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It packs 5,000 million transistors into a 366 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.7M per mm². The RX 6700M uses the Navi 22 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It contains 17,200 million transistors in a smaller 335 mm² die, achieving 51.3M transistors per mm² — roughly 3.7 times higher density. The RX 6700M also carries 36 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro W7100. The FirePro’s FP16 throughput is 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), while the RX 6700M achieves 22.12 TFLOPS FP16 via a 2:1 ratio. The RX 6700M supports PCIe 4.0 x16, whereas the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The RX 6700M’s memory clock runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus the FirePro’s 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), and it supports the newer GDDR6 memory type.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W7100 averages 25,856 points, which is 0.9% higher than the RX 6700M’s 25,633 average. However, this comparison is limited because the two cards only share two benchmark tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan), while the RX 6700M has nine additional tests that are not run on the FirePro.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6700M scores 90,816 versus the FirePro W7100’s 27,529. The RX 6700M leads by 69.7%, which is the largest percentage difference in any shared benchmark.

Q: What memory specifications differ between the two?

A: The FirePro W7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700M has 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth — double the bandwidth despite a narrower bus.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 6700M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro W7100 only supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 6700M has Vulkan 1.4 versus the FirePro’s Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The RX 6700M has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6700M leads in all three categories.

Q: Are both cards end-of-life products?

A: Yes, both are marked as end-of-life in production status. The FirePro W7100 released on 2014-08-11, and the RX 6700M released on 2021-05-30.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The FirePro W7100 uses a 28 nm process; the RX 6700M uses 7 nm. Transistor count is 5,000 million versus 17,200 million. Die size is 366 mm² versus 335 mm². The FirePro has no base, boost, or game clock listed, while the RX 6700M has a base clock of 1489 MHz, boost of 2400 MHz, and game clock of 2300 MHz. Memory differs: 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 10 GB GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units are 1792 versus 2304; TMUs are 112 versus 144; ROPs are 32 versus 64. The RX 6700M adds 36 ray tracing cores. Pixel rate is 29.44 GPixel/s versus 153.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 103.0 GTexel/s versus 345.6 GTexel/s. FP32 is 3.297 TFLOPS versus 11.06 TFLOPS. FP16 is 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 150 W versus 135 W. The FirePro is single-slot with a 1x 6-pin connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W; the RX 6700M is an IGP with no power connectors. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.2 versus portable-device-dependent. The FirePro has dimensions of 241 mm length and 111 mm height; the RX 6700M has no listed dimensions. API support differs on DirectX (12_0 versus 12 Ultimate) and Vulkan (1.2.170 versus 1.4). Release dates are 2014-08-11 versus 2021-05-30.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two benchmarks are shared between these GPUs, and the RX 6700M wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700M scores 77,666 against the FirePro W7100’s 24,182. The deltaPct of -68.9% indicates the FirePro trails by that amount. This is a 3.2x raw score advantage for the RX 6700M. The Vulkan test shows an even wider margin: the RX 6700M scores 90,816 versus 27,529, a 69.7% deficit for the FirePro. The RX 6700M’s Vulkan score is 3.3x higher.

The FirePro W7100’s only comparative brightness comes from its nearestRivals data. Its average score of 25,856 places it 0.1% above the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842), 0.5% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740), and 0.5% above the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 (25,726). It trails only the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25,891) by 0.1%. The RX 6700M’s average of 25,633 sits 0.4% below the Radeon Pro W5700 and RTX 3080 Ti Mobile, 0.8% below the FirePro D700, and 0.9% below the FirePro W7100 itself.

The RX 6700M’s additional benchmarks — not available for the FirePro — show 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 1,845, Geekbench Metal at 91,911, PassMark G3D at 13,536, and PassMark GPU Compute at 5,191. These scores are not directly comparable to the FirePro but contribute to the RX 6700M’s overall profile and explain why its average is lower despite crushing the FirePro in shared tests.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6700M wins in every directly comparable compute scenario. OpenCL workloads see a 68.9% performance advantage. Vulkan workloads see a 69.7% advantage. The RX 6700M also wins on raw throughput metrics: FP32 is 3.35x higher (11.06 TFLOPS versus 3.297 TFLOPS), texture rate is 3.35x higher (345.6 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s), and pixel rate is 5.2x higher (153.6 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s). Memory bandwidth is exactly double (320.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s). It has more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, plus ray tracing cores. It supports newer APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and PCIe 4.0.

The FirePro W7100 wins in form factor and connectivity. It is a single-slot card with a 241 mm length and 111 mm height, requiring only a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. It provides 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs for multi-monitor professional setups. The RX 6700M is an IGP with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs, meaning it is not suitable for desktop workstation builds. The FirePro also has a slightly higher average benchmark score (25,856 versus 25,633) and sits 0.9% above the RX 6700M in the nearestRivals comparison. For legacy GCN 3.0 software compatibility or deployments requiring discrete display outputs, the FirePro W7100 retains a niche. For any modern compute workload — particularly Vulkan-based applications or OpenCL compute — the RX 6700M is the only rational choice based on the benchmark evidence.