GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA TITAN RTX and AMD FirePro W8000 represent two very different eras of professional graphics hardware, and the benchmark data reflects a generational chasm rather than a close contest. In the two shared tests, the TITAN RTX delivers absolute dominance, posting a Geekbench OpenCL score of 144,858 against the FirePro’s 24,440, a 492.7% advantage. The Vulkan result is similarly lopsided, with the TITAN RTX scoring 136,073 versus 33,981, a 300.4% lead. The TITAN RTX wins both head-to-head matchups, and its average benchmark score of 31,676 sits slightly above its closest rival, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell, by 0.5%. The FirePro W8000’s average of 29,211 places it just 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, showing it competes with a much older performance tier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data leaves no ambiguity about the winner in raw compute. In Geekbench OpenCL, the TITAN RTX’s 144,858 score is nearly six times higher than the FirePro W8000’s 24,440. That 492.7% delta is not a marginal improvement; it is a complete overhaul of compute capability. For Vulkan, the TITAN RTX again dominates with 136,073 points against 33,981, a 300.4% gap. These are the only two tests both cards share, and the TITAN RTX wins both outright.

Looking beyond the direct comparison, the TITAN RTX’s average benchmark score of 31,676 places it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W8000’s 29,211 average lands in the 75th percentile. The percentile difference is small despite the massive per-test deltas, which suggests the FirePro’s average is buoyed by its own benchmark set that includes less demanding workloads. The TITAN RTX’s individual results show strength across APIs: 20,491 in Passmark G3D, 10,034 in Passmark GPU Compute, and 860 in Passmark G2D. It also scores 3794 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The FirePro has no such breadth of data, with only the two Geekbench entries, so its average is less representative of overall capability.

The nearest rival data reinforces the TITAN RTX’s position. Its average score is 0.5% above the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell and 1.5% above both the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q and Quadro M5000. This means the TITAN RTX is not merely better than the FirePro; it sits at the top of its own peer group. The FirePro, by contrast, is essentially tied with the RX Vega M GH (0% delta) and just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Arc A370M. It trails the RX 470 by 0.7% and the RX 6800M by 1.2%. In short, the FirePro W8000 is competitive with mid-range laptop and desktop GPUs from a later generation, while the TITAN RTX is competing with modern professional workstation cards.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is the root cause of the benchmark disparity. The TITAN RTX uses the TU102 chip built on TSMC’s 12 nm process, packing 18,600 million transistors into a 754 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.7M per mm². The FirePro W8000 uses the Tahiti chip on a 28 nm process, with 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, for a density of 12.3M per mm². The TITAN RTX has more than four times the transistor count and more than double the die area, which directly translates into its massive compute advantage.

The TITAN RTX is built on the Turing architecture, which introduces dedicated hardware features absent from the FirePro’s GCN 1.0 design. The TITAN RTX includes 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The FirePro W8000 has no RT or tensor cores, relying entirely on its 1792 shading units for all processing. The TITAN RTX also has 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, compared to the FirePro’s 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. These are not incremental differences; the TITAN RTX has 2.6 times the shading units and three times the ROPs.

Memory architecture further separates the two. The TITAN RTX ships with 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W8000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, capped at 176.0 GB/s. The TITAN RTX offers six times the memory capacity and nearly four times the bandwidth. Clock speeds also favor the TITAN RTX, with a base of 1350 MHz and boost of 1770 MHz, while the FirePro’s clocks are not listed in the data, only its memory clock of 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) versus the TITAN RTX’s 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The TITAN RTX’s pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 509.8 GTexel/s dwarf the FirePro’s 28.80 GPixel/s and 100.8 GTexel/s.

API support also differs. The TITAN RTX supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W8000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The TITAN RTX’s newer DirectX and Vulkan versions enable features the older card cannot access, which explains its Vulkan benchmark dominance. The TITAN RTX also has higher power requirements at 280 W TDP with 2x 8-pin connectors, versus the FirePro’s 225 W TDP with 2x 6-pin connectors. The TITAN RTX suggests a 600 W PSU, while the FirePro suggests 550 W.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA TITAN RTX is the superior card by every measurable metric. It wins both shared benchmarks by margins of 492.7% and 300.4%, has a higher average score, and sits in a higher percentile tier relative to its peers. The FirePro W8000, despite its 75th percentile ranking, is simply outclassed in compute, memory, and feature support.

Choose the TITAN RTX if you need maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, or hardware ray tracing and tensor core acceleration. Its 24 GB of GDDR6 and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets, and its 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores enable workloads the FirePro cannot handle at all. The TITAN RTX’s 76th percentile ranking and 0.5% lead over the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell confirm it is a top-tier professional card.

Choose the FirePro W8000 only if your workload is strictly limited to legacy applications that predate modern APIs and require no more than 4 GB of memory. Its 176.0 GB/s bandwidth and 3.226 TFLOPS FP32 performance are sufficient for basic 2D and light 3D tasks, but the data shows it is competitive with the RX Vega M GH and Intel Arc A370M, not with the TITAN RTX. The FirePro’s 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI outputs might suit specific multi-display setups, but its 28 nm process and GCN 1.0 architecture are obsolete.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification. The TITAN RTX uses a 12 nm process, while the FirePro uses 28 nm. Transistor counts are 18,600 million versus 4,313 million, and die sizes are 754 mm² versus 352 mm², giving densities of 24.7M/mm² and 12.3M/mm² respectively. The TITAN RTX has a base clock of 1350 MHz and boost of 1770 MHz; the FirePro has no listed base or boost clocks. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the TITAN RTX and 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) for the FirePro.

Memory capacity is 24 GB GDDR6 versus 4 GB GDDR5, with bus widths of 384-bit versus 256-bit and bandwidths of 672.0 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s. Shading units are 4608 versus 1792, TMUs are 288 versus 112, and ROPs are 96 versus 32. The TITAN RTX has 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores; the FirePro has none. Pixel rates are 169.9 GPixel/s versus 28.80 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 509.8 GTexel/s versus 100.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 16.31 TFLOPS versus 3.226 TFLOPS. The TITAN RTX supports FP16 at 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1); the FirePro has no FP16 data.

TDP is 280 W versus 225 W, with power connectors of 2x 8-pin versus 2x 6-pin, and suggested PSUs of 600 W versus 550 W. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C for the TITAN RTX, versus 4x DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI for the FirePro. Physical dimensions are 267 mm x 116 mm x 35 mm for the TITAN RTX and 279 mm x 111 mm (width not listed) for the FirePro. Release dates are December 2018 versus June 2012. The TITAN RTX’s launch MSRP is 2,499 USD, while the FirePro’s is 1,599 USD. Both cards are end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN RTX scores 144,858 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 492.7% higher than the AMD FirePro W8000’s 24,440.

Q: Does the FirePro W8000 support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The FirePro W8000 has no RT cores, while the TITAN RTX includes 72 RT cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The TITAN RTX offers 672.0 GB/s across a 384-bit bus, while the FirePro W8000 provides 176.0 GB/s across a 256-bit bus.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The TITAN RTX averages 31,676, which is 0.5% higher than its nearest rival, the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell. The FirePro W8000 averages 29,211, essentially tied with the RX Vega M GH at 0% delta.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The TITAN RTX supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W8000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both the NVIDIA TITAN RTX and AMD FirePro W8000 are listed as end-of-life products.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA TITAN RTX wins every category where data exists. It dominates compute-heavy workloads, as shown by its 492.7% OpenCL lead and 300.4% Vulkan lead. Its 24 GB memory capacity suits large-scale data processing, and its 672.0 GB/s bandwidth supports high-resolution textures and complex scenes. The 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores give it a decisive edge in ray tracing and AI inference tasks, which the FirePro cannot perform at all. Its higher pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 509.8 GTexel/s make it better for real-time rendering at high resolutions.

The AMD FirePro W8000 has no benchmark wins against the TITAN RTX. Its only advantages are qualitative: a lower TDP of 225 W versus 280 W, a shorter length of 279 mm versus 267 mm (though it is shorter in length, the TITAN RTX is slightly shorter at 267 mm), and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 plus 1x SDI outputs, which might be preferable for specific broadcast or multi-display configurations. Its 4 GB memory and 176.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for legacy 2D CAD or basic video output, but the data shows it performs at the level of the RX Vega M GH and Intel Arc A370M, not the TITAN RTX. For any modern professional workload involving 3D rendering, compute, or AI, the TITAN RTX is the only viable choice based on the benchmark evidence.