AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 Comparison
AMD FirePro D300
Radeon Pro Vega 16
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD FirePro D300 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
The Verdict
The recorded data divides these two AMD professional GPUs by workload era and API preference. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 claims the newer architecture, a 68th percentile standing among all GPUs, and an average benchmark score of 23250. The AMD FirePro D300 sits at the 64th percentile with an average score of 19637, placing it roughly 18% behind the Vega 16 in overall averaged performance. For users prioritizing modern graphics APIs, particularly Vulkan, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the clear pick, as it leads by 10.5% in that specific test. Conversely, for legacy OpenCL compute tasks, the FirePro D300 wins the head-to-head by 6.4%, making it the better choice for older professional software pipelines that rely heavily on that API. The data shows a split decision: the Vega 16 wins the future-facing workload, while the D300 holds its ground in a legacy compute scenario. Neither card dominates outright, as the head-to-head record stands at one win each.
Architecture Differences
The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses the Vega 12 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The FirePro D300 uses the Pitcairn chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This node difference explains the power envelope: the Vega 16 has a 75 W TDP, while the D300 draws 150 W. The Vega 16 also features a smaller transistor count footprint (not listed) but compensates with a newer design, whereas the D300 lists 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die with a transistor density of 13.2M per mm².
The memory subsystems are completely different. The Vega 16 packs 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 307.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The D300 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 162.6 GB/s. That is a bandwidth advantage of nearly 2x for the Vega 16. The Vega 16 also features 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the D300 has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite fewer shaders, the Vega 16 reaches higher pixel and texture rates: 38.08 GPixel/s and 76.16 GTexel/s, versus 27.20 GPixel/s and 68.00 GTexel/s for the D300. The Vega 16 outputs 2.437 TFLOPS FP32 and supports FP16 at 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1), while the D300 lists 2.176 TFLOPS FP32 with no FP16 support.
API support also differs. The Vega 16 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Vega 16 is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with portable-device-dependent outputs, whereas the D300 is a single-slot card with four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and a 242 mm length. The D300 also lists a 450 W suggested PSU, while the Vega 16 has no such requirement listed.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The database contains two direct comparison tests between these GPUs. In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro D300 scores 19515, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 18268. That is a 6.4% lead for the D300. This result is notable because the D300 has a lower peak FP32 throughput (2.176 TFLOPS versus 2.437 TFLOPS) and lower memory bandwidth, yet it still wins in OpenCL. The likely explanation lies in the driver maturity and the D300's higher shading unit count (1280 versus 1024), which may benefit certain compute workloads that scale with shader count rather than raw bandwidth.
In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 21832, while the FirePro D300 scores 19759. That is a 10.5% lead for the Vega 16. This margin is larger than the OpenCL gap, indicating the newer architecture handles Vulkan more efficiently. The Vega 16's support for Vulkan 1.3, compared to the D300's 1.2.170, likely contributes to this advantage. The Vega 16 also has a significantly higher memory bandwidth, which can benefit modern graphics workloads that are bandwidth-sensitive.
The average benchmark scores reinforce the overall trend. The Vega 16 averages 23250, placing it just 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6600M and 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon R9 M290X, both at 23273 and 23276 respectively. It also sits 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 at 23315. The D300 averages 19637, placing it 0.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 at 19602 and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX at 19410. The D300 is also 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT at 19765 and 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla K40m at 19885.
FAQ
Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?
A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has an average benchmark score of 23250, while the AMD FirePro D300 averages 19637. The Vega 16 sits at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, the D300 at the 64th.
Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Geekbench Vulkan?
A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 21832, which is 10.5% higher than the FirePro D300's score of 19759. The Vega 16 wins this test.
Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Geekbench OpenCL?
A: The FirePro D300 scores 19515, which is 6.4% higher than the Radeon Pro Vega 16's score of 18268. The D300 wins this test.
Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?
A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro D300 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 162.6 GB/s bandwidth.
Q: Which GPU has a higher TDP?
A: The AMD FirePro D300 has a TDP of 150 W, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a TDP of 75 W. The D300 draws twice the power.
Q: What API versions does each GPU support?
A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The FirePro D300 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 wins in scenarios that leverage modern graphics APIs and high-bandwidth memory. Its 10.5% Vulkan lead over the D300 makes it the better choice for any application that has transitioned to Vulkan, including newer game engines, CAD viewports, and GPU compute frameworks that favor explicit graphics APIs. The Vega 16's 4 GB HBM2 memory with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth provides nearly double the bandwidth of the D300, which benefits texture-heavy workloads, large framebuffers, and data-intensive compute tasks. Its FP16 support (4.874 TFLOPS) also gives it an edge in applications that use mixed-precision compute, a feature entirely absent from the D300. The Vega 16 is also the only one of the two with a Geekbench Metal score (29650), indicating macOS-specific performance data is recorded for this card.
The AMD FirePro D300 wins in legacy OpenCL compute scenarios. Its 6.4% OpenCL lead over the Vega 16 suggests that older professional software, which may not have been optimized for newer architectures, runs more efficiently on the D300. The D300's higher shading unit count (1280 versus 1024) and texture unit count (80 versus 64) likely contribute to this advantage in compute tasks that scale with parallel execution units rather than memory bandwidth. The D300 also has a higher FP32 throughput per watt in this specific test, despite its higher absolute TDP. For users running established OpenCL-based rendering, simulation, or analysis pipelines on older driver stacks, the D300 remains a viable option. Its four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs also make it a practical choice for multi-monitor professional setups, whereas the Vega 16's outputs are portable-device-dependent.
Specification Differences
The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The process node differs: the Vega 16 uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries, the D300 uses 28 nm at TSMC. The D300 lists transistor count (2,800 million), die size (212 mm²), and transistor density (13.2M per mm²); the Vega 16 has no recorded values for these fields. Clock speeds differ: the Vega 16 has a base clock of 815 MHz and a boost clock of 1190 MHz, while the D300 has no base or boost clocks listed. Memory clocks also differ: the Vega 16 runs at 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective), the D300 at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective).
Memory configuration is a major divider: 4 GB HBM2 on 1024-bit versus 2 GB GDDR5 on 256-bit, with bandwidth of 307.2 GB/s versus 162.6 GB/s. The Vega 16 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs; the D300 has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate: 38.08 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 76.16 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s. FP32: 2.437 TFLOPS versus 2.176 TFLOPS. The Vega 16 supports FP16 at 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1); the D300 has no FP16 data. TDP: 75 W versus 150 W. The D300 lists a 450 W suggested PSU; the Vega 16 does not.
Slot width: the Vega 16 is an IGP, the D300 is a single-slot card. Display outputs: the Vega 16 is portable-device-dependent, the D300 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2. The D300 has a length of 242 mm (9.5 inches); the Vega 16 has no dimensions recorded. DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_1). Vulkan support: 1.3 versus 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Release dates differ: the Vega 16 launched on 2018-11-13, the D300 on 2014-01-17. The D300 lists a predecessor (FirePro Terascale) and successor (Radeon Instinct), while the Vega 16 has neither recorded. Both are marked end-of-life.