AMD FirePro W7100 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two direct comparison points between the AMD FirePro W7100 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, both drawn from the Geekbench suite. In the OpenCL test, the RTX 3080 delivers a score of 152,423 against the FirePro W7100's 24,182. That is a delta of 84.1% in NVIDIA's favor, making it the largest margin recorded in any shared benchmark. The gap is substantial enough that the two cards are not operating in the same performance tier for compute workloads.

The Vulkan result is closer, though still clearly NVIDIA's. The RTX 3080 scores 33,620 while the FirePro W7100 scores 27,529, a difference of 18.1%. This narrower margin suggests that the Vulkan API narrows the architectural gap between the two, but it does not erase it. The RTX 3080 wins both head-to-head tests, with the final tally sitting at 2 wins for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the RTX 3080 also has results in PassMark and 3DMark suites that the FirePro W7100 does not share. In PassMark G3D, the RTX 3080 records 25,086, and in GPU Compute it records 14,397. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yields 4,407. These additional data points are not directly comparable to the AMD card, but they do expand the RTX 3080's measurable footprint across different rendering APIs and compute workloads.

The average benchmark score tells a more nuanced story. The FirePro W7100 posts an average of 25,856 across its two recorded tests, while the RTX 3080 averages 23,172 across ten tests. That the RTX 3080's average is lower despite dominating the head-to-head pair is a function of the wider test set, which includes older DirectX 9, 10, and 11 PassMark entries that score far lower than the modern compute tests. The FirePro W7100's average is buoyed by having only its two Geekbench scores counted, both of which are respectable for a workstation part.

Percentile placement reinforces the split. The FirePro W7100 sits at the 71st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RTX 3080 sits at the 68th percentile. These are close standings, and the FirePro's slight edge here owes to its consistent performance in the two tests it does run. For the RTX 3080, the wide range of scores across different API generations drags the percentile down despite its commanding lead in modern compute tests.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3080 wins every scenario where both cards have recorded data. Its OpenCL advantage is overwhelming, with a score more than six times higher than the FirePro W7100's. This makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL acceleration. The Vulkan result, while closer, still favors NVIDIA by 18.1%, so any Vulkan-based rendering or compute task should favor the newer card.

The FirePro W7100's strengths are relative rather than absolute. Its average benchmark score of 25,856 edges out the RTX 3080's 23,172, and its 71st percentile placement is three points higher. For users working within the constraints of its era, namely GCN 3.0 architecture and a 2014 release window, the card holds its own in synthetic compute tests. The nearest rivals for the FirePro W7100 include the AMD FirePro D700 at 25,842 (0.1% behind) and the AMD Radeon R9 M395X at 25,891 (0.1% ahead), indicating that it is tightly clustered with other mid-generation AMD parts.

The RTX 3080's nearest rivals tell a different story. The NVIDIA P106-100 sits 0.3% ahead at 23,249, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 sits 0.3% ahead at 23,250, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600M sits 0.4% ahead at 23,273. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, suggesting that the RTX 3080's average score is representative of a dense cluster of mid-range GPUs in the database, despite its much higher peak performance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different manufacturing generations and fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD FirePro W7100 uses the Tonga chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The die contains 5,000 million transistors on 366 mm², giving a transistor density of 13.7 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 uses the GA102 chip with Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. Its die holds 28,300 million transistors on 628 mm², for a density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. NVIDIA's chip is both larger and dramatically denser, reflecting the six years of process advancement between the two releases.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The RTX 3080 has 8,704 shading units, 272 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX 3080 also carries dedicated hardware that the FirePro W7100 lacks entirely: 68 ray tracing cores and 272 tensor cores. These are not present in the AMD card, which predates both technologies.

Memory configuration is another major divergence. The FirePro W7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3080 uses 10 GB of GDDR6X on a 320-bit bus, delivering 760.3 GB/s. That is nearly five times the memory bandwidth, which directly impacts texture-heavy workloads and large data sets. The memory clock on the AMD card is 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the RTX 3080 runs at 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The higher effective data rate of GDDR6X is what enables the bandwidth advantage.

The RTX 3080 also brings explicit clock specifications that the FirePro W7100 lacks. The AMD card has no base or boost clock listed, while the NVIDIA card runs at a 1440 MHz base and 1710 MHz boost. Peak throughput numbers reflect this. The FirePro W7100 delivers 3.297 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, while the RTX 3080 delivers 29.77 TFLOPS for both. Pixel rate is 29.44 GPixel/s on the AMD card versus 164.2 GPixel/s on the NVIDIA card, and texture rate is 103.0 GTexel/s versus 465.1 GTexel/s.

Interface support also differs. The FirePro W7100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX 3080 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.2 on the AMD card versus 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a on the NVIDIA card. API support shows the RTX 3080 supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Physical specifications differ as well. The FirePro W7100 is a single-slot card with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 150 W TDP, with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RTX 3080 is dual-slot with a 1x 12-pin connector, a 320 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 700 W. The AMD card measures 241 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The NVIDIA card measures 285 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the stronger card in every shared benchmark. Its OpenCL score of 152,423 crushes the FirePro W7100's 24,182, and its Vulkan score of 33,620 beats 27,529. For any workload that uses these APIs, the RTX 3080 is the correct choice.

The FirePro W7100 is not without its niche. Its average benchmark score of 25,856 exceeds the RTX 3080's 23,172, and its 71st percentile placement is above NVIDIA's 68th. Users who care about consistency across a narrow set of compute benchmarks might find the AMD card acceptable, especially given its lower power draw of 150 W versus 320 W and its single-slot form factor. But those advantages are contextual, not categorical.

The RTX 3080's launch MSRP is 699 USD. The FirePro W7100 has no listed launch MSRP in the database.

For compute performance, modern API support, ray tracing, tensor acceleration, and memory bandwidth, the RTX 3080 is the clear winner. For users constrained by slot space, power draw, or a workload that only touches its specific benchmark profile, the FirePro W7100 remains a functional if dated option. The verdict, strictly from the data, is that the RTX 3080 wins the head-to-head decisively.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 152,423 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro W7100 scores 24,182, a difference of 84.1%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 3080 scores 33,620 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 18.1% higher than the FirePro W7100's 27,529.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 3080 has 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth from 10 GB of GDDR6X on a 320-bit bus. The FirePro W7100 has 160.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Does the RTX 3080 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX 3080 includes 68 ray tracing cores. The FirePro W7100 has no ray tracing cores listed.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The FirePro W7100 has a 150 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RTX 3080 has a 320 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The FirePro W7100 has an average benchmark score of 25,856, while the RTX 3080 has an average of 23,172.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W7100 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 5,000 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 366 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.7M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 1440 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1710 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 10 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 760.3 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 8704 |

| TMUs | 112 | 272 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | Not listed | 68 |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 272 |

| Pixel Rate | 29.44 GPixel/s | 164.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 103.0 GTexel/s | 465.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.297 TFLOPS | 29.77 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.297 TFLOPS | 29.77 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 320 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 12-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Length | 241 mm (9.5 inches) | 285 mm (11.2 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 112 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | Not listed | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Release Date | 2014-08-11 | 2020-08-31 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 699 USD |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | GeForce 20 |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Polaris | GeForce 40 |