AMD FirePro W8000 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800 Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX 6800 vs AMD FirePro W8000

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 and AMD FirePro W8000 represent two very different eras of AMD GPU design, separated by eight years of architecture evolution. The RX 6800, built on RDNA 2.0, is a modern gaming-focused card from the Radeon RX 6000 series, while the FirePro W8000 is a workstation-oriented product from 2012 based on the original GCN 1.0 architecture. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner in the RX 6800, but the FirePro W8000 remains competitive in one specific compute workload. The RX 6800 holds a 2-0 win record in head-to-head tests, with an average benchmark score of 30095 compared to the FirePro W8000's 29211, a modest 3% gap that belies the architectural chasm between them.

Where Each One Wins

The data reveals a starkly one-sided competitive landscape, but with a single notable exception worth examining. In the geekbench_opencl test, the RX 6800 scores 24508 against the FirePro W8000's 24440 — a razor-thin margin of just 0.3%. This is effectively a statistical tie, indicating that for raw OpenCL compute throughput, both cards deliver nearly identical results despite their massive generational differences. This is the FirePro W8000's strongest showing, and it suggests that the older card's GCN compute architecture still holds up for certain general-purpose GPU workloads.

Everywhere else, the RX 6800 dominates decisively. In geekbench_vulkan, the margin is enormous: 115107 versus 33981, a 238.7% advantage for the RX 6800. This is not a close contest; it is a generational wipeout. The RX 6800 also owns all benchmark categories where it alone has data: 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 scores 3188, geekbench_metal reaches 153635, passmark_g3d hits 22067, and passmark_gpu_compute records 10864. The FirePro W8000 has no corresponding scores in these tests, so the RX 6800 wins them by default, but the magnitude of the Vulkan gap suggests these other numbers would also favor the newer card substantially.

For use-case segmentation, the RX 6800 is the clear choice for any DirectX 12, Vulkan, or Metal workload — essentially all modern gaming and graphics applications. Its passmark_directx_12 score of 89, passmark_directx_11 score of 214, and passmark_directx_9 score of 257 indicate broad API coverage. The FirePro W8000's only realistic win scenario is OpenCL compute, and even there it merely ties rather than wins. The RX 6800 also leads in 2D performance with a passmark_g2d score of 990, though no comparable figure exists for the FirePro W8000.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is profound, starting with the manufacturing process. The RX 6800 uses a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the FirePro W8000 uses a 28 nm process, also from TSMC. This process shrink allows the RX 6800 to pack 26,800 million transistors into a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.5 million per square millimeter. The FirePro W8000, by contrast, contains 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, with a density of just 12.3 million per square millimeter. That is a 4.2x density advantage for the RX 6800, which explains how it fits nearly 6.2x more transistors into only 1.5x the die area.

The compute architecture diverges completely. The RX 6800 uses RDNA 2.0 with the Navi 21 chip, part of the Navi II generation. The FirePro W8000 uses GCN 1.0 with the Tahiti chip, from the FirePro GCN Wx000 generation. This is not an incremental update but a fundamental redesign. RDNA 2.0 introduces dedicated ray tracing hardware: the RX 6800 has 60 rtCores, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro W8000. The RX 6800 also has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, versus 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the FirePro W8000. The RX 6800 more than doubles the shading units and triples the ROP count.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The RX 6800 has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 1815 MHz, and a boost clock of 2105 MHz. The FirePro W8000's clock data is not provided, but its memory clocks are revealing: 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective data rate versus the RX 6800's 2000 MHz memory clock at 16 Gbps effective. Memory bandwidth follows suit: 512.0 GB/s for the RX 6800 versus 176.0 GB/s for the FirePro W8000 — a 2.9x advantage. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the RX 6800's GDDR6 memory is vastly faster than the FirePro W8000's GDDR5.

The RX 6800 also supports newer APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170, and it adds ray tracing capability. The FirePro W8000 does support OpenGL 4.6, matching the RX 6800, and its FP16 compute is not listed, suggesting it lacks the RX 6800's 32.33 TFLOPS FP16 throughput (at 2:1 ratio). The RX 6800's FP32 rate is 16.17 TFLOPS versus 3.226 TFLOPS for the FirePro W8000 — a 5x difference. Pixel rate is 202.1 GPixel/s versus 28.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 505.2 GTexel/s versus 100.8 GTexel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two benchmark tests include both cards, and they illustrate the generational chasm perfectly. In geekbench_opencl, the RX 6800 scores 24508 and the FirePro W8000 scores 24440. The RX 6800 wins by 0.3%, which is within statistical noise. This near-parity in OpenCL is remarkable given the architectural differences, and it suggests that the FirePro W8000's GCN design was heavily optimized for compute workloads — a legacy of its workstation heritage. For developers relying on OpenCL for general-purpose GPU computing, this result indicates the older card remains serviceable.

The geekbench_vulkan test tells a completely different story. The RX 6800 scores 115107, while the FirePro W8000 manages only 33981. The RX 6800 wins by 238.7%, meaning it delivers more than 3.4x the Vulkan performance. This is the single largest delta in the dataset, and it highlights the RX 6800's modern driver support and architectural efficiency in low-level graphics APIs. Vulkan is the go-to API for modern game engines and compute applications, so this gap has real-world implications for any current workload.

The RX 6800 also has exclusive benchmarks that demonstrate its breadth. Its 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 score of 3188 shows strong DirectX 12 performance. The geekbench_metal score of 153635 indicates excellent Apple ecosystem compatibility. Passmark results are mixed by API generation: 128 in DirectX 10, 214 in DirectX 11, 89 in DirectX 12, and 257 in DirectX 9. The passmark_g3d score of 22067 places it in the 75th percentile of all GPUs, matching the FirePro W8000's percentile exactly, but the RX 6800's average benchmark score of 30095 is 3% higher than the FirePro W8000's 29211.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear recommendation: the AMD Radeon RX 6800 is the superior GPU for virtually every workload measured. Its 238.7% lead in Vulkan, 5x advantage in FP32 throughput, and 2.9x memory bandwidth advantage make it the only sensible choice for gaming, modern graphics, or compute workloads that use current APIs. The RX 6800's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti (0.5% ahead), RTX 5070 Mobile (0.6% ahead), RTX 2080 Ti (1% ahead), and AMD Radeon RX 6700 (1.1% behind), placing it in solid mid-high-end company. Its 75th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms it as a capable, well-rounded performer.

The FirePro W8000 is only relevant in one narrow scenario: OpenCL compute, where it matches the RX 6800 within 0.3%. Its nearest rivals — AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (0% delta), Intel Arc A370M (0.1% ahead), AMD Radeon RX 470 (0.7% ahead), and AMD Radeon RX 6800M (1.2% behind) — show it sits in a much lower performance tier. For any user running Vulkan applications, the FirePro W8000 is effectively obsolete. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 176.0 GB/s bandwidth are severe limitations for modern datasets, and its lack of ray tracing hardware excludes it from DirectX 12 Ultimate content.

Choose the RX 6800 if you need modern gaming performance, ray tracing, high memory bandwidth, or broad API support. Choose the FirePro W8000 only if you have a legacy OpenCL workload that cannot be migrated and you need its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs plus SDI connectivity for professional video environments. The RX 6800's 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, HDMI 2.1, and USB Type-C outputs are more modern but lack the SDI option.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 dominates, scoring 115107 in geekbench_vulkan versus 33981 for the FirePro W8000, a 238.7% advantage.

Q: Are these cards close in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in geekbench_opencl the RX 6800 scores 24508 and the FirePro W8000 scores 24440, a difference of only 0.3%.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 6800 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the FirePro W8000 has 4 GB of GDDR5. Both use a 256-bit bus, but bandwidth is 512.0 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the FirePro W8000 support ray tracing?

A: No. The FirePro W8000 has no rtCores, while the RX 6800 includes 60 dedicated ray tracing cores as part of RDNA 2.0.

Q: What are the transistor counts for each GPU?

A: The RX 6800 contains 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, while the FirePro W8000 has 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX 6800 averages 30095 across all benchmarks, compared to 29211 for the FirePro W8000, a 3% difference. Both rank in the 75th percentile of all GPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6800 | AMD FirePro W8000 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 26,800 million | 4,313 million |

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 352 mm² |

| Shading Units | 3840 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 240 | 112 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 60 | None |

| Memory Size | 16 GB GDDR6 | 4 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 176.0 GB/s |

| FP32 Performance | 16.17 TFLOPS | 3.226 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 32.33 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 202.1 GPixel/s | 28.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 505.2 GTexel/s | 100.8 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 250 W | 225 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 550 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 4x DisplayPort 1.2, 1x SDI |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) |

| Release Date | 2020-10-27 | 2012-06-13 |

| Launch MSRP | 579 USD | 1,599 USD |