AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT and the AMD FirePro W7100 sit at opposite ends of the hardware timeline, yet their aggregate benchmark scores are remarkably close. The RX 6750 XT, a RDNA 2.0 part from the Radeon RX 6000 series, posts an average benchmark score of 26011, while the older GCN 3.0-based FirePro W7100 trails by a mere 0.6%, with an average score of 25856. Both cards occupy the 71st percentile of all GPUs, but the data reveals that this statistical tie is a mirage, masking radically different strengths in specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share only two common benchmark results in the data set, and those results could not paint a starker contrast. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the FirePro W7100 delivers a score of 24182, which is 32.3% higher than the RX 6750 XT's 16360. This is a decisive victory for the older workstation card, showcasing its raw compute throughput in a general-purpose GPU workload. The FirePro W7100's lead here is substantial, suggesting its architecture is particularly well-suited to the types of parallel compute tasks that OpenCL benchmarks often prioritize.

However, the RX 6750 XT responds with a crushing counterpunch in the Geekbench Vulkan test. There, it scores 98089, which is a staggering 256.3% higher than the FirePro W7100's 27529. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational obliteration. The RX 6750 XT's Vulkan score is nearly four times that of the FirePro W7100, indicating that the newer card's driver support and hardware design are vastly more efficient at handling modern, low-level graphics APIs. The delta of 256.3% is the single largest performance gap between the two cards in any test, and it completely redefines the head-to-head comparison.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 6750 XT has a much richer data profile. Its scores include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2548, a Geekbench Metal score of 137249, and a Passmark G3D score of 20700. The FirePro W7100 lacks corresponding results for these tests, so a direct comparison is impossible. Yet, the data that does exist shows a clear split: the FirePro W7100 wins the compute-oriented OpenCL test, while the RX 6750 XT dominates the graphics-oriented Vulkan test. The wins are split one apiece, but the magnitude of the RX 6750 XT's Vulkan victory dwarfs the FirePro W7100's OpenCL advantage.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards is vast, starting with the manufacturing process. The RX 6750 XT is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the FirePro W7100 uses a 28 nm process. This allows the RX 6750 XT to pack 17,200 million transistors into a 335 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.3M per mm². The FirePro W7100, by contrast, houses only 5,000 million transistors on a larger 366 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 13.7M per mm². The RX 6750 XT is not just newer; it is a fundamentally more integrated and efficient design.

The core configurations differ dramatically as well. The RX 6750 XT features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). It also includes 40 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro W7100. The older card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and just 32 ROPs. Clock speeds amplify this gap: the RX 6750 XT runs at a base of 2150 MHz and boosts to 2600 MHz, while the FirePro W7100's clocks are not even listed in the data. This translates to a massive throughput advantage for the RX 6750 XT, which achieves 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 26.62 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (at a 2:1 ratio). The FirePro W7100 manages only 3.297 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio).

Memory subsystems also tell a story of progress. The RX 6750 XT uses 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, but its bandwidth is just 160.0 GB/s. The RX 6750 XT's memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), compared to the FirePro W7100's 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). In terms of pixel and texture rates, the RX 6750 XT posts 166.4 GPixel/s and 416.0 GTexel/s, while the FirePro W7100 manages only 29.44 GPixel/s and 103.0 GTexel/s. The API support also differs: the RX 6750 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the FirePro W7100 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data points to a clear use-case split. The FirePro W7100 wins in compute-heavy, OpenCL-based workloads. Its 32.3% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test suggests that applications leveraging OpenCL for tasks like scientific simulation, data processing, or certain rendering pipelines will see better performance on the older card. This is likely due to the FirePro W7100's GCN 3.0 design, which was optimized for general-purpose compute during its era. For users running legacy professional applications that rely on OpenCL, the FirePro W7100 remains a viable, and in this specific case, superior option.

The RX 6750 XT, on the other hand, is the clear winner for modern graphics and gaming workloads. Its 256.3% advantage in the Geekbench Vulkan test is evidence of its strength in low-overhead, high-performance rendering. The presence of 40 ray tracing cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate means it is built for contemporary games that utilize ray tracing and advanced features. Its higher pixel rate (166.4 GPixel/s vs. 29.44 GPixel/s) and texture rate (416.0 GTexel/s vs. 103.0 GTexel/s) further cement its dominance in rasterization-heavy tasks. The RX 6750 XT also holds a significant advantage in raw FP32 throughput, delivering 13.31 TFLOPS compared to the FirePro W7100's 3.297 TFLOPS, making it better suited for modern graphics shaders.

The FirePro W7100's strengths are narrow but real. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, while slower in bandwidth, is still a substantial pool for certain professional applications. The card is also a single-slot design with a 150 W TDP, compared to the RX 6750 XT's dual-slot, 250 W design. This makes the FirePro W7100 easier to integrate into dense workstation chassis. It also offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the RX 6750 XT provides one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 26011, compared to the AMD FirePro W7100's 25856, a difference of 0.6%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark?

A: The Radeon RX 6750 XT scores 98089 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 256.3% higher than the FirePro W7100's score of 27529, making it the decisive winner in that test.

Q: Is the FirePro W7100 better at any benchmark?

A: Yes, the FirePro W7100 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 24182, which is 32.3% higher than the Radeon RX 6750 XT's score of 16360.

Q: What are the key architectural differences between the two GPUs?

A: The Radeon RX 6750 XT uses a 7 nm RDNA 2.0 architecture with 17,200 million transistors and 2560 shading units, while the FirePro W7100 uses a 28 nm GCN 3.0 architecture with 5,000 million transistors and 1792 shading units.

Q: Does the Radeon RX 6750 XT have ray tracing support?

A: Yes, the Radeon RX 6750 XT includes 40 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature that the FirePro W7100 does not have at all.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon RX 6750 XT has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 432.0 GB/s, compared to the FirePro W7100's 160.0 GB/s.

The Verdict

The data clearly shows that the Radeon RX 6750 XT is the superior all-around graphics card. Its dominance in the Vulkan benchmark, coupled with its massive advantages in pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute, make it the obvious choice for gaming, modern rendering, and any workload that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate or Vulkan. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth provide ample headroom for high-resolution textures and complex scenes. The inclusion of ray tracing cores is a significant feature that the FirePro W7100 simply cannot match.

The FirePro W7100 is not without merit, but its appeal is highly specialized. Its 32.3% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test indicates that it remains a strong performer for legacy compute applications that are optimized for OpenCL. Its lower TDP of 150 W and single-slot design make it a practical choice for space-constrained professional workstations. However, its 28 nm GCN 3.0 architecture, 3.297 TFLOPS FP32 performance, and lack of modern API support (capped at DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.2.170) severely limit its future relevance.

Ultimately, the choice depends entirely on the workload. For users dealing with modern graphics, gaming, or any application built on current APIs, the Radeon RX 6750 XT is the definitive pick. For users stuck with OpenCL-dependent professional software and tight power budgets, the FirePro W7100 offers a narrow, but real, edge. The aggregate scores may be close, but the benchmark results indicate that these two cards serve entirely different purposes in the hardware ecosystem.