AMD FirePro W7100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Comparison

The AMD FirePro W7100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti are both end-of-life 28 nm GPUs, but they target different workloads. Benchmark data shows a near-total split: the GTX 780 Ti wins OpenCL by a wide margin, while the FirePro W7100 edges ahead in Vulkan. However, the FirePro W7100 offers 8 GB VRAM, a lower 150 W TDP, and single-slot cooling, making it the more versatile workstation card. The GTX 780 Ti, with 2880 shading units and 5.345 TFLOPS FP32, is the raw compute beast. This analysis uses only the provided benchmark scores, specifications, and rival comparisons.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti is the clear leader in raw OpenCL compute. In the head-to-head geekbench_opencl test, it scores 27326 versus the FirePro W7100’s 24182, a decisive 11.5% advantage. This aligns with its larger silicon: 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, plus a 384-bit memory bus delivering 336.6 GB/s. If your workload is OpenCL-heavy — typical of older compute pipelines or GPGPU tasks — the GTX 780 Ti is the stronger pick.

The AMD FirePro W7100 wins the Vulkan benchmark, scoring 27529 against the GTX 780 Ti’s 27238, a slim 1.1% margin. Vulkan is a modern low-level API, and the FirePro’s GCN 3.0 architecture with DirectX 12 (12_0) support (versus the GTX 780 Ti’s 12_0 vs 11_1) gives it a slight edge in newer titles and applications. Additionally, the FirePro W7100’s 8 GB VRAM doubles the GTX 780 Ti’s 3 GB, making it superior for large datasets, multi-display setups, or memory-hungry professional workloads. The FirePro also consumes 150 W versus 250 W, needs only a single 6-pin connector, and fits in a single slot — all advantages for dense workstation builds.

The wins are evenly split: one benchmark each. But the nature of those wins matters. The GTX 780 Ti’s OpenCL lead is large and absolute; the FirePro’s Vulkan lead is narrow. For legacy compute, NVIDIA wins outright. For modern API support and VRAM capacity, AMD takes the crown.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, with 5.345 TFLOPS versus the AMD FirePro W7100’s 3.297 TFLOPS. This is a 62% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: How much VRAM does each card have?

A: The AMD FirePro W7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti has 3 GB of GDDR5. The FirePro offers 5 GB more capacity.

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 780 Ti, with 336.6 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, versus the FirePro W7100’s 160.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. NVIDIA’s bandwidth is more than double.

Q: Do they support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The AMD FirePro W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The AMD card has a higher feature level.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W7100, with an average benchmark score of 25856, versus the GTX 780 Ti’s 24236. The FirePro sits at the 71st percentile of all GPUs, the GTX 780 Ti at the 70th.

Q: What are the TDP and power connector requirements?

A: The FirePro W7100 has a 150 W TDP and uses a single 6-pin connector, with a suggested 450 W PSU. The GTX 780 Ti has a 250 W TDP, uses a 6-pin plus 8-pin connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs were tested in two benchmarks: geekbench_opencl and geekbench_vulkan. The results are polarizing.

In geekbench_opencl, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti scores 27326, while the AMD FirePro W7100 scores 24182. The delta is -11.5% from the FirePro’s perspective, meaning NVIDIA leads by over 3000 points. This is a substantial gap, driven by the GTX 780 Ti’s higher shading unit count (2880 vs 1792), more TMUs (240 vs 112), and faster memory subsystem. The GTX 780 Ti’s 5.345 TFLOPS FP32 output is the key factor — OpenCL workloads that scale with raw shader throughput will overwhelmingly favor NVIDIA.

In geekbench_vulkan, the roles reverse, but narrowly. The AMD FirePro W7100 scores 27529, versus the GTX 780 Ti’s 27238, a 1.1% delta. This 291-point difference is small but real. The FirePro’s newer GCN 3.0 architecture and Vulkan 1.2.170 support (versus 1.2.175 on NVIDIA, both effectively current) likely contribute to the edge. Additionally, the FirePro’s 8 GB frame buffer may help in Vulkan scenes that allocate large textures or buffers, though the GTX 780 Ti’s higher bandwidth could offset that in some cases.

The average benchmark scores reflect the split: the FirePro W7100 averages 25856, the GTX 780 Ti 24236. The FirePro’s higher average is driven by its Vulkan win and strong OpenCL showing, despite losing that test. The GTX 780 Ti’s average is dragged down by its lack of a Metal benchmark (the FirePro has no Metal score either, but the GTX 780 Ti’s only other benchmark, geekbench_metal at 18144, is not part of the head-to-head). In the provided data, the GTX 780 Ti has three benchmark entries (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan) with an average of 24236, while the FirePro has two (OpenCL, Vulkan) averaging 25856.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The AMD FirePro W7100 uses the Tonga chip (GCN 3.0 architecture) with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti uses the GK110B chip (Kepler architecture) with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die. The GTX 780 Ti has higher transistor density at 12.6M / mm² versus 13.7M / mm² for the FirePro, but the NVIDIA chip is physically larger.

Clock speeds differ: the GTX 780 Ti has a base clock of 875 MHz and boost of 928 MHz, while the FirePro W7100 lists no base or boost clock in the data. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 780 Ti runs at 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective), the FirePro at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The FirePro W7100 has 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 780 Ti has 3 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 336.6 GB/s. NVIDIA has over double the bandwidth; AMD has over double the capacity.

Compute resources: the FirePro W7100 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 780 Ti has 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. NVIDIA leads in every count. Pixel rate: 29.44 GPixel/s (FirePro) vs 55.68 GPixel/s (GTX 780 Ti). Texture rate: 103.0 GTexel/s vs 222.7 GTexel/s.

Power and physical design: the FirePro W7100 is a 150 W single-slot card with a 6-pin connector and 450 W suggested PSU. The GTX 780 Ti is a 250 W dual-slot card with 6-pin plus 8-pin connectors and 600 W suggested PSU. Dimensions: the FirePro is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, the GTX 780 Ti is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, both 111 mm (4.4 inches) high, with the GTX 780 Ti adding a 38 mm (1.5 inches) width.

Display outputs: the FirePro W7100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2, while the GTX 780 Ti has 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The FirePro is clearly designed for multi-monitor professional use.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FirePro W7100 is built on GCN 3.0 architecture, codenamed Tonga, and belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. It uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Its FP32 and FP16 performance are identical at 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), indicating symmetric compute paths.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti is built on Kepler architecture, using the GK110B chip, part of the GeForce 700 generation. It also uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, but with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die — significantly larger. The GTX 780 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. It has no listed FP16 capability, meaning its FP32 output of 5.345 TFLOPS is the primary compute metric.

The architectural differences are stark. GCN 3.0 is a modern, feature-rich design with explicit support for 1:1 FP16, which is valuable for machine learning or media workloads that use half precision. Kepler is an older architecture optimized for raw FP32 throughput, which explains its higher FLOP count but lacks the FP16 path. The GTX 780 Ti’s transistor count is 40% higher (7,080 vs 5,000 million), and its die is 53% larger (561 vs 366 mm²), reflecting a more complex layout. The FirePro’s higher transistor density (13.7M / mm² vs 12.6M / mm²) suggests more efficient packing, but the NVIDIA chip still delivers more absolute compute.

The FirePro W7100’s predecessor is FirePro Terascale, with successor Radeon Pro Polaris. The GTX 780 Ti’s predecessor is GeForce 600, successor GeForce 900. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

Choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti if your priority is raw OpenCL compute. It delivers 27326 in that benchmark, an 11.5% lead over the FirePro W7100, backed by 5.345 TFLOPS FP32, 2880 shading units, and 336.6 GB/s bandwidth. This is the card for legacy GPGPU tasks, CUDA-accelerated workloads, or any OpenCL application that scales with shading unit count. Its 3 GB VRAM may limit large datasets, but its compute density is unmatched in this pairing.

Choose the AMD FirePro W7100 if you need modern API support, VRAM capacity, or power efficiency. It wins Vulkan (27529 vs 27238), supports DirectX 12 (12_0) versus NVIDIA’s 11_1, and offers 8 GB VRAM — over double the GTX 780 Ti’s 3 GB. Its 150 W TDP and single-slot design make it far easier to integrate into multi-GPU or dense workstation systems. The 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs are ideal for multi-monitor professional setups, and its higher average benchmark score (25856 vs 24236) reflects better overall balance.

The data does not declare a single winner. The GTX 780 Ti is the compute specialist; the FirePro W7100 is the generalist with staying power. For users running modern Vulkan applications or needing large frame buffers, the FirePro’s 1.1% Vulkan lead and 5 GB VRAM advantage are decisive. For users locked into OpenCL pipelines, the GTX 780 Ti’s 11.5% lead is impossible to ignore. The GTX 780 Ti also carries a launch MSRP of 699 USD, which is mentioned for reference only — the FirePro has no listed MSRP. Ultimately, the correct choice depends entirely on your workload’s API and memory requirements.