AMD FirePro W8000 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800M Comparison

The AMD FirePro W8000 and AMD Radeon RX 6800M represent two distant generations of AMD graphics technology, and the benchmark data reflects a complete shift in performance leadership. In the two head-to-head tests available, the Radeon RX 6800M decisively outperforms the FirePro W8000, winning both by massive margins. The FirePro W8000, a professional workstation card from 2012, trails the mobile Radeon RX 6800M by 72.1% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 64.1% in Geekbench Vulkan, making the latter the clear choice for any compute-oriented workload.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6800M wins outright in both benchmark categories where direct comparison data exists. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 87,621 against the FirePro W8000’s 24,440, a delta of -72.1% from the FirePro’s perspective. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6800M scores 94,766 versus 33,981 for the FirePro W8000, a -64.1% gap. These are not marginal victories; the RX 6800M delivers roughly 3.6 times the OpenCL performance and 2.8 times the Vulkan performance of the older card.

The AMD FirePro W8000 offers no benchmark wins in the data. Its strengths lie elsewhere, specifically in its professional feature set and legacy interface support. It features 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI outputs, making it suitable for specialized multi-display or broadcast workflows that the RX 6800M cannot match, as the latter’s display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." The FirePro W8000 also has a dedicated launch MSRP of 1,599 USD, positioning it as a professional tool, whereas the RX 6800M has no launch MSRP listed, indicating its mobile, OEM-oriented nature.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and profound. The FirePro W8000 uses the Tahiti chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It contains 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². In contrast, the RX 6800M uses the Navi 22 chip based on RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It packs 17,200 million transistors into a slightly smaller 335 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 51.3M / mm². This density advantage is a direct result of the process node shrink and architectural efficiency gains.

Core configuration differences are stark. The FirePro W8000 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6800M nearly doubles these counts with 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Additionally, the RX 6800M introduces 40 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the older FirePro. Memory subsystems also diverge sharply: the FirePro uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 176.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 6800M uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 384.0 GB/s bandwidth—more than double the throughput despite a narrower bus, thanks to faster memory clocks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data tells a one-sided story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6800M scores 87,621 versus 24,440 for the FirePro W8000. The FirePro’s score is only 27.9% of the RX 6800M’s, meaning the newer card is approximately 3.6 times faster. This is the larger of the two gaps, and it reflects the RX 6800M’s massive advantage in raw compute throughput: its FP32 rating is 12.24 TFLOPS compared to the FirePro’s 3.226 TFLOPS, and the RX 6800M even supports FP16 at 24.47 TFLOPS (2:1) while the FirePro lists no FP16 capability.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6800M scores 94,766 versus 33,981 for the FirePro, a -64.1% delta. While slightly smaller in relative terms, the absolute gap of 60,785 points is substantial. The RX 6800M’s Vulkan support is 1.4, while the FirePro is limited to 1.2.170, and the newer card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the FirePro’s older DirectX 12 (11_1). These API differences contribute to the RX 6800M’s superior performance in modern graphics workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800M. Its FP32 rating is 12.24 TFLOPS versus 3.226 TFLOPS for the FirePro W8000, and it also offers FP16 at 24.47 TFLOPS (2:1), which the FirePro lacks entirely.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 6800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W8000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 176.0 GB/s bandwidth. Despite the narrower bus, the RX 6800M delivers over double the bandwidth.

Q: Does the FirePro W8000 have any advantages in display outputs?

A: Yes. The FirePro W8000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI outputs, which are fixed and professional-grade. The RX 6800M’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 6800M achieves 51.3M transistors per mm², while the FirePro W8000 achieves 12.3M per mm². This is due to the process node shrink from 28 nm to 7 nm.

Q: Which card has ray tracing support?

A: Only the RX 6800M. It has 40 ray tracing cores, while the FirePro W8000 has none.

Q: By what margin does the RX 6800M win in Vulkan?

A: The RX 6800M scores 94,766 versus 33,981 for the FirePro, a 64.1% advantage. This is the smaller of the two benchmark gaps but still represents roughly 2.8 times the performance.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6800M is the superior performer in every measurable benchmark category. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins exceeding 64%, offers more than triple the FP32 compute throughput, and supports modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate. Its 12 GB GDDR6 memory with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth dwarfs the FirePro’s 4 GB GDDR5 configuration.

The AMD FirePro W8000 should only be considered by users with specific legacy professional needs. Its 1x SDI output and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 connections are unique, and its launch MSRP of 1,599 USD indicates a workstation pedigree. However, its end-of-life status, 2012 release date, and lack of any benchmark win make it a poor choice for general compute or gaming workloads. The RX 6800M, despite being a mobile part, is categorically faster and more capable.

For anyone choosing between these two, the RX 6800M is the logical pick unless the FirePro’s specific professional display outputs are a hard requirement. Even then, the performance gap—72.1% in OpenCL and 64.1% in Vulkan—is so large that alternative solutions should be sought for display needs.

Specification Differences

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

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 4,313 million | 17,200 million |

| Die Size | 352 mm² | 335 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 51.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | N/A | 2116 MHz |

| Boost Clock | N/A | 2390 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 2300 MHz |

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

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 176.0 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 112 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | N/A | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 28.80 GPixel/s | 153.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 100.8 GTexel/s | 382.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.226 TFLOPS | 12.24 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | N/A | 24.47 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 145 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | N/A |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2, 1x SDI | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2012-06-13 | 2021-05-30 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,599 USD | N/A |