AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive matchup. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT wins both recorded head-to-head tests, leaving the AMD FirePro W7100 without a single victory. The most dramatic gap appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the RX 7700 XT scores 138,383 against the FirePro W7100's 24,182. That is a delta of 82.5% in favor of the newer card, a massive margin that reflects the generational chasm between these two architectures.

The Vulkan result tells a similar story, though with a smaller gap. The RX 7700 XT posts 46,443, while the FirePro W7100 manages 27,529. The delta here is 40.7%, still a substantial lead but less overwhelming than the OpenCL result. What this suggests is that the RX 7700 XT's advantage is most pronounced in compute-heavy workloads, while the Vulkan gap, though significant, shows the older card can still hold its own in certain API scenarios relative to its own capabilities.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the RX 7700 XT records an average of 22,549 across all its tests, while the FirePro W7100 averages 25,856. This inverted relationship is worth noting: the FirePro's average is skewed upward because it has only two benchmark entries, both of which are relatively strong for its era. The RX 7700 XT, by contrast, has ten entries, including several Passmark tests that pull its average down. The Passmark G3D score for the RX 7700 XT is 22,547, which aligns closely with its overall average, while its Passmark GPU Compute score is 12,912. These figures indicate that the RX 7700 XT's real-world gaming and compute performance is consistent across multiple test suites.

When placed against their nearest rivals, the data shows both cards sitting in similar percentile territory. The FirePro W7100 ranks in the 71st percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 7700 XT sits in the 67th percentile. This is a curious statistical outcome: the older card ranks higher in the overall distribution despite losing decisively in direct comparison. The explanation lies in the rival sets. The FirePro's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro D700 (average score 25,842, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (average score 25,891, delta -0.1%), both of which are extremely close in performance. The RX 7700 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (average score 22,435, delta 0.5%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile (average score 22,729, delta -0.8%), showing it trades blows with modern mobile GPUs. The percentile difference is a reflection of the broader GPU landscape, not direct performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT wins decisively. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 138,383 is 82.5% higher than the FirePro W7100's 24,182. The RX 7700 XT also leads in Vulkan with 46,443 versus 27,529, a 40.7% gap.

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

A: The FirePro W7100's average benchmark score is 25,856. Its nearest rival, the AMD FirePro D700, scores 25,842, a delta of just 0.1%. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 25,891, which is 0.1% higher. These are essentially performance ties.

Q: What is the RX 7700 XT's standing among its peers?

A: The RX 7700 XT has an average benchmark score of 22,549. It sits 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (22,435) and 1.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22,895). Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile, is 0.8% ahead.

Q: Does the FirePro W7100 have any benchmark where it outperforms the RX 7700 XT?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 7700 XT wins both. The FirePro W7100 records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do the average scores compare between the two cards?

A: The FirePro W7100 has a higher average benchmark score of 25,856 compared to the RX 7700 XT's 22,549. However, this is due to the different number of tests each card has, not indicative of relative performance. The RX 7700 XT has ten benchmark entries, while the FirePro has only two.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between these GPUs?

A: The FirePro W7100 ranks in the 71st percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 7700 XT ranks in the 67th percentile. Despite the RX 7700 XT winning every direct comparison, the FirePro sits higher in the overall distribution due to its benchmark set and the performance of its nearest rivals.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is vast. The FirePro W7100 uses the Tonga chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,000 million transistors on a die size of 366 mm², yielding a transistor density of 13.7 million per square millimeter. The RX 7700 XT, by contrast, uses the Navi 32 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at the same foundry. It packs 28,100 million transistors into a smaller die of 346 mm², achieving a density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. That is nearly six times the transistor density, a direct consequence of the process node shrink.

The shader configurations differ dramatically. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The RX 7700 XT more than doubles the shading units to 3,456, nearly doubles the TMUs to 216, and triples the ROPs to 96. The RX 7700 XT also introduces 54 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro W7100. Neither card has tensor cores.

The compute capabilities reflect these differences. The FirePro W7100 delivers 3.297 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same 3.297 TFLOPS for FP16, a 1:1 ratio. The RX 7700 XT delivers 35.17 TFLOPS of FP32 and 35.17 TFLOPS of FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio. That is an order of magnitude difference in raw compute throughput. The pixel rate tells a similar story: 29.44 GPixel/s for the FirePro versus 244.2 GPixel/s for the RX 7700 XT. The texture rate jumps from 103.0 GTexel/s to 549.5 GTexel/s.

The memory subsystems are equally divergent. The FirePro W7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth at a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The RX 7700 XT uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The RX 7700 XT has more memory and nearly triple the bandwidth, despite a narrower bus width, thanks to faster memory technology.

API support also differs. The FirePro W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 7700 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer card supports a higher tier of DirectX 12 and a newer Vulkan specification. The RX 7700 XT also has a wider array of display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C, compared to the FirePro's 4x DisplayPort 1.2.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear separation between the two cards. The FirePro W7100 has a process node of 28 nm, while the RX 7700 XT uses 5 nm. Transistor counts are 5,000 million versus 28,100 million. Die size is 366 mm² versus 346 mm². Clock speeds differ: the FirePro has no recorded base or boost clock, while the RX 7700 XT has a base clock of 1435 MHz, a boost clock of 2544 MHz, and a game clock of 2171 MHz.

Memory capacity is 8 GB versus 12 GB, with GDDR5 versus GDDR6. Bus width is 256-bit versus 192-bit, and bandwidth is 160.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s. The shading units are 1,792 versus 3,456, TMUs are 112 versus 216, and ROPs are 32 versus 96. The RX 7700 XT has 54 ray tracing cores; the FirePro has none. Pixel rate is 29.44 GPixel/s versus 244.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 103.0 GTexel/s versus 549.5 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 3.297 TFLOPS versus 35.17 TFLOPS.

Power requirements also differ. The FirePro W7100 has a TDP of 150 W with a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RX 7700 XT has a TDP of 245 W with dual 8-pin connectors and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The FirePro is single-slot, while the RX 7700 XT is dual-slot. Physical dimensions: the FirePro is 241 mm long and 111 mm high, while the RX 7700 XT is 267 mm long, 135 mm high, and 50 mm wide.

Bus interfaces differ as well: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the FirePro versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 7700 XT. Production status is end-of-life for the FirePro and active for the RX 7700 XT. Release dates are 2014-08-11 for the FirePro and 2023-09-05 for the RX 7700 XT. The FirePro has no launch MSRP recorded, while the RX 7700 XT has a launch MSRP of 449 USD.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the RX 7700 XT a clean sweep in direct comparisons. It wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, with 82.5% and 40.7% leads respectively. The FirePro W7100 has no recorded wins in the head-to-head tests. This means that for any workload represented by these benchmarks, the RX 7700 XT is the superior choice.

The FirePro W7100 does have a claim to a different kind of victory: efficiency relative to its era. It achieves its performance at 150 W TDP, requiring only a 450 W PSU and a single 6-pin connector. The RX 7700 XT needs 245 W, dual 8-pin connectors, and a 550 W PSU. For legacy systems with limited power delivery, the FirePro is easier to integrate. Its single-slot form factor also allows it to fit in chassis where a dual-slot card would not.

However, the performance gap is so large that the power draw difference is almost irrelevant in practice. The RX 7700 XT delivers 35.17 TFLOPS of FP32 at 245 W, while the FirePro delivers 3.297 TFLOPS at 150 W. The newer card produces over ten times the compute throughput per card, and even accounting for the 63% higher power draw, the efficiency per watt is overwhelmingly in favor of the RX 7700 XT.

The FirePro's 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it suitable for multi-display professional setups that rely on that specific output configuration. The RX 7700 XT offers HDMI 2.1a, DisplayPort 2.1, and USB Type-C, which provides more modern connectivity options but a different output mix. For users with existing DisplayPort 1.2 infrastructure, the FirePro has a compatibility edge, but this is a narrow use case.

The Verdict

The data leads to a clear conclusion. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the superior GPU by every measurable benchmark metric. It wins the OpenCL test by 82.5% and the Vulkan test by 40.7%. It has more than ten times the FP32 compute throughput, nearly three times the memory bandwidth, and over eight times the pixel rate. For any user choosing between these two cards based on performance, the RX 7700 XT is the only rational pick.

The FirePro W7100's only advantages are historical. It was released in 2014 as a professional workstation card, and its 71st percentile ranking reflects the GPU landscape of that era. Its 150 W power draw and single-slot design are attractive for certain constrained environments, and its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs serve legacy multi-monitor setups. But these are niche benefits that do not outweigh the performance deficit.

Users with a FirePro W7100 looking to upgrade will find the RX 7700 XT to be a massive leap forward in almost every respect. The 12 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 8 GB of GDDR5, the 54 ray tracing cores, the PCIe 4.0 interface, and the modern API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4) all point to a card built for current and future workloads. The FirePro, while still functional, is end-of-life with no path forward.

The verdict is unambiguous. The RX 7700 XT wins the head-to-head comparison, the architecture comparison, and the specification comparison. It also holds its own against its nearest rivals, sitting within 1.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 and ahead of the RTX 5060 Mobile. The FirePro W7100, despite its higher percentile ranking, cannot compete with the modern card. Choose the RX 7700 XT for performance, feature support, and longevity. Choose the FirePro W7100 only if the specific constraints of power, slot width, or DisplayPort 1.2 outputs are absolute requirements.