GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA CMP 70HX and AMD FirePro W8000 represent two vastly different eras of GPU design, yet both occupy the same 75th percentile among all GPUs. The benchmark data reveals a consistent, if narrow, advantage for the NVIDIA part. In Geekbench OpenCL, the CMP 70HX scores 25,135 against the FirePro W8000’s 24,440, a 2.8% lead. The gap widens in Geekbench Vulkan, where the CMP 70HX reaches 35,817 versus 33,981, a 5.4% margin. Across both tests, the NVIDIA card wins 2–0, but the margins are modest enough to warrant a closer look at what each architecture brings to the table.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark runs tell a story of incremental superiority rather than a generational blowout. In OpenCL, the CMP 70HX’s 25,135 score edges out the FirePro W8000’s 24,440 by just 695 points. That 2.8% delta places the NVIDIA card within a hair of its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla M60 (30,490 average score, 0% delta), and slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (30,433, 0.1%). The FirePro W8000, meanwhile, sits at 29,211 average, essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (29,197, 0% delta) and Intel Arc A370M (29,175, 0.1%). The fact that a 2012 workstation card keeps pace with modern mobile GPUs in this metric is notable, but the CMP 70HX still holds the edge.

Vulkan tells a clearer story. The CMP 70HX’s 35,817 score represents a 5.4% jump over the FirePro’s 33,981, a 1,836-point gap. This is the larger of the two wins, suggesting the NVIDIA architecture handles modern API overhead more efficiently. Interestingly, the delta between the two cards in Vulkan (5.4%) is nearly double the OpenCL delta (2.8%), which hints that the CMP 70HX’s newer feature set pays dividends when the workload leverages lower-level access to the hardware. The FirePro W8000’s Vulkan support is listed as 1.2.170, while the CMP 70HX runs Vulkan 1.4, a version gap that likely contributes to the performance difference.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the CMP 70HX lands at 30,476, while the FirePro W8000 averages 29,211. That 1,265-point gap (roughly 4.3%) is consistent with the individual test results. The CMP 70HX’s closest rival, the Tesla M60 (30,490), is virtually identical in average score, while the FirePro W8000 trails the RX 6800M (28,874) by 1.2% and the RX 470 (28,996) by 0.7%. The data suggests the FirePro W8000 is competitive with mid-range GPUs from several generations later, but the CMP 70HX sits in a slightly higher performance tier.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the NVIDIA CMP 70HX is the faster card in both tested workloads. It wins OpenCL by 2.8% and Vulkan by 5.4%, and its average benchmark score (30,476) is 4.3% higher than the FirePro W8000’s (29,211). If raw compute performance is the only criterion, the choice is clear: the CMP 70HX delivers more. However, the FirePro W8000 is not without merit. Its 75th percentile standing matches the CMP 70HX, and its closest rivals include the RX 6800M, a high-end laptop GPU from a much later generation. For users constrained by older software or specific workstation requirements, the FirePro W8000’s 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and SDI connectivity make it a functional display card, whereas the CMP 70HX has no display outputs at all, its sole purpose is compute.

The verdict hinges on use case. For headless compute tasks, the CMP 70HX is the better performer with a higher average score and wins in both benchmarks. For any workload requiring visual output, the FirePro W8000 is the only option of the two, given the CMP 70HX’s lack of display outputs. The data does not show the FirePro W8000 winning any benchmark, but its feature set fills a niche the NVIDIA card cannot touch.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The CMP 70HX uses the GA104 chip on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm Samsung process. It packs 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm². The FirePro W8000, by contrast, relies on the Tahiti chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm node. It houses just 4,313 million transistors across a 352 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per mm². The density difference, roughly 3.6x in favor of NVIDIA, explains how the CMP 70HX fits far more compute resources into a similar physical footprint.

The CMP 70HX features 3,840 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 30 RT cores and 120 tensor cores. The FirePro W8000 counters with 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores listed. This means the NVIDIA card has more than double the shader count, nearly double the ROPs, and dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations that the AMD card simply lacks. The pixel rate tells the story: the CMP 70HX delivers 89.28 GPixel/s versus the FirePro’s 28.80 GPixel/s, a 3.1x advantage. Texture rate follows suit: 167.4 GTexel/s versus 100.8 GTexel/s, a 66% lead for NVIDIA.

FP32 performance is where the gap becomes most pronounced. The CMP 70HX outputs 10.71 TFLOPS, while the FirePro W8000 manages 3.226 TFLOPS, a 3.3x difference. The NVIDIA card also lists FP16 at 10.71 TFLOPS (1:1), while the AMD card has no FP16 figure provided. The memory subsystems reinforce this divide: the CMP 70HX uses 8 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, achieving 608.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W8000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a similarly wide 256-bit bus, but only 176.0 GB/s. That’s a 3.5x bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA part.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply on nearly every specification. The CMP 70HX runs at a 1365 MHz base clock and 1395 MHz boost, with memory at 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The FirePro W8000 lists no base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective). Process node differs: 8 nm Samsung for NVIDIA versus 28 nm TSMC for AMD. Transistor count is 17,400 million versus 4,313 million, and die size is 392 mm² versus 352 mm². Shading units are 3,840 versus 1,792, TMUs 120 versus 112, ROPs 64 versus 32. The CMP 70HX has 30 RT cores and 120 tensor cores; the FirePro W8000 has none.

Memory capacity is 8 GB versus 4 GB, both on 256-bit buses, but the type differs (GDDR6X vs GDDR5) and bandwidth is 608.3 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s. The CMP 70HX has no TDP listed, while the FirePro W8000 draws 225 W; suggested PSU is 200 W for NVIDIA and 550 W for AMD. Power connectors are 1x 12-pin versus 2x 6-pin. Bus interface: PCIe 1.0 x4 for the CMP 70HX (an unusual choice for a modern card) versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the FirePro W8000. Display outputs: none for NVIDIA, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 plus 1x SDI for AMD. API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6 on both, Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170. Dimensions are close: 267 mm length versus 279 mm, both 112 mm and 111 mm height, both dual-slot.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 70HX delivers 10.71 TFLOPS FP32, compared to the AMD FirePro W8000’s 3.226 TFLOPS, a 3.3x advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The CMP 70HX achieves 608.3 GB/s with 8 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, while the FirePro W8000 manages 176.0 GB/s with 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same bus width.

Q: Can the NVIDIA CMP 70HX output video to a display?

A: No. The CMP 70HX has no display outputs, whereas the FirePro W8000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI.

Q: What is the difference in transistor density?

A: The CMP 70HX packs 44.4 million transistors per mm², while the FirePro W8000 has 12.3 million per mm², reflecting the 8 nm process versus 28 nm.

Q: Does the FirePro W8000 support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: No. The FirePro W8000 lists no RT cores or tensor cores, while the CMP 70HX has 30 RT cores and 120 tensor cores.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The CMP 70HX averages 30,476, compared to the FirePro W8000’s 29,211, placing the NVIDIA card 4.3% ahead overall.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA CMP 70HX wins in every benchmark test recorded. Its OpenCL score of 25,135 beats the FirePro’s 24,440 by 2.8%, and its Vulkan score of 35,817 beats 33,981 by 5.4%. The average benchmark score of 30,476 versus 29,211 reinforces this dominance. The CMP 70HX’s strengths lie in compute-heavy workloads, its 3,840 shading units, 10.71 TFLOPS FP32, and 608.3 GB/s bandwidth make it the clear choice for headless number-crunching. The presence of RT and tensor cores adds flexibility for workloads that leverage these features, though no benchmark in the data specifically tests them.

The AMD FirePro W8000 wins in practical connectivity. Its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and SDI outputs make it a functional workstation card for multi-monitor setups or video production environments. It also supports PCIe 3.0 x16, a more standard interface than the CMP 70HX’s PCIe 1.0 x4, which could bottleneck data transfer in some systems. The FirePro W8000’s 225 W TDP, while higher than the CMP 70HX’s suggested 200 W PSU, is paired with a more conventional 2x 6-pin power requirement versus the NVIDIA card’s 1x 12-pin. Neither card wins on price (the FirePro W8000 has a launch MSRP of 1,599 USD; the CMP 70HX has none listed), but the data shows the NVIDIA part is the performance winner, while the AMD part wins on output flexibility and bus compatibility.