AMD FirePro W7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 570 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 570 compare to the AMD FirePro W7100 in average benchmark score?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28,766, while the FirePro W7100 scores 25,856. That places the RX 570 roughly 11.3% higher overall, and it sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs compared to the FirePro's 71st percentile.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The RX 570 has 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs, whereas the FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units and 112 TMUs. Both cards share 32 ROPs.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The FirePro W7100 offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 570 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus but delivers 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. So the FirePro has double the capacity, while the RX 570 has significantly higher bandwidth.

Q: Are both cards from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The RX 570 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process (Polaris 20), while the FirePro W7100 uses GCN 3.0 on a 28 nm process (Tonga). The RX 570 is built by GlobalFoundries, and the FirePro W7100 by TSMC.

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark?

A: The RX 570 scores 42,752 in Vulkan, which is 55.3% ahead of the FirePro W7100's 27,529. This is the largest single-benchmark gap between the two cards in the recorded data.

Q: Do the cards have the same power requirements?

A: Yes, both have a 150 W TDP, a single 6-pin power connector, and a suggested 450 W power supply. However, the RX 570 is dual-slot, while the FirePro W7100 is single-slot.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 570 wins both head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 570 scores 32,084 versus 24,182 for the FirePro W7100, a 32.7% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 570 scores 42,752 versus 27,529, a 55.3% advantage. There are no benchmark categories in the database where the FirePro W7100 leads.

That said, the use-case split is not purely about compute speed. The FirePro W7100 carries 8 GB of memory, doubling the RX 570's 4 GB. For workloads that need large working sets, such as certain rendering, simulation, or multi-application professional workflows, the extra capacity can matter even when raw throughput is lower. The FirePro W7100 is also a single-slot card with four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the RX 570 is dual-slot with one DVI, one HDMI 2.0b, and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The FirePro's denser output panel and slimmer profile make it a better fit for multi-display professional setups or chassis with limited slot spacing.

In raw compute, the RX 570 wins everywhere. Its FP32 throughput is 5.095 TFLOPS versus 3.297 TFLOPS for the FirePro, and its texture rate is 159.2 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s. Pixel rate also favors the RX 570 at 39.81 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s. For users whose primary metric is compute or graphics performance, the RX 570 is the clear choice. For users who need more memory or a single-slot form factor, the FirePro W7100 has structural advantages that no benchmark score in this dataset captures.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different GCN generations. The RX 570 is built on GCN 4.0 with the Polaris 20 chip, while the FirePro W7100 uses GCN 3.0 with the Tonga chip. The RX 570 is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, and the FirePro W7100 on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This node difference is reflected in transistor density: the RX 570 packs 5,700 million transistors in a 232 mm² die for 24.6M transistors per mm², while the FirePro W7100 uses 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die for 13.7M transistors per mm². The RX 570's smaller, denser process allows higher clocks and better efficiency per transistor count, even though the FirePro W7100 has a larger physical die.

The compute unit layout also differs. The RX 570 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan API version differs slightly: the RX 570 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro W7100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Memory architecture is where the FirePro differentiates. Both use a 256-bit GDDR5 bus, but the RX 570 runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for 224.0 GB/s, while the FirePro runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for 160.0 GB/s. The RX 570's memory clock is higher, giving it 40% more bandwidth. The FirePro compensates with 8 GB of capacity versus 4 GB.

Both cards have identical TDPs of 150 W, use a single 6-pin connector, and suggest a 450 W power supply. Both are PCIe 3.0 x16 and share the same 241 mm board length (9.5 inches). The RX 570 is dual-slot; the FirePro W7100 is single-slot. The FirePro also has a specified height of 111 mm (4.4 inches), while the RX 570's height is not recorded.

The release timing and product lineage also differ. The RX 570 was released in April 2017, succeeding Arctic Islands and preceding Vega. The FirePro W7100 was released in August 2014, succeeding FirePro Terascale and preceding Radeon Pro Polaris. Both are end-of-life products. The RX 570 had a launch MSRP of 169 USD; the FirePro W7100 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every compute specification except ROP count, TDP, power connector, suggested PSU, and bus interface.

• Process node: RX 570 is 14 nm; FirePro W7100 is 28 nm.
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries versus TSMC.
• Transistors: 5,700 million versus 5,000 million.
• Die size: 232 mm² versus 366 mm².
• Transistor density: 24.6M / mm² versus 13.7M / mm².
• Architecture: GCN 4.0 versus GCN 3.0.
• Chip: Polaris 20 versus Tonga.
• Base clock: 1168 MHz versus not recorded.
• Boost clock: 1244 MHz versus not recorded.
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: 4 GB versus 8 GB.
• Memory bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: 2048 versus 1792.
• TMUs: 128 versus 112.
• Pixel rate: 39.81 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 159.2 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s.
• FP32: 5.095 TFLOPS versus 3.297 TFLOPS.
• FP16: 5.095 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1).
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus single-slot.
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 4x DisplayPort 1.2.
• Vulkan API: 1.3 versus 1.2.170.
• Release date: 2017-04-17 versus 2014-08-11.
• Average benchmark score: 28,766 versus 25,856.

Identical items include 32 ROPs, GDDR5 memory type, 256-bit bus width, 150 W TDP, 1x 6-pin power connector, 450 W suggested PSU, PCIe 3.0 x16, 241 mm length, DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and end-of-life production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 570 scores 32,084 against the FirePro W7100's 24,182. That is a 32.7% lead for the RX 570. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens to 55.3%: the RX 570 scores 42,752 while the FirePro W7100 scores 27,529. The RX 570 wins both tests, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head matchups.

The Vulkan result is particularly lopsided. A 55.3% delta is more than half again the FirePro's score, which suggests the RX 570's higher memory bandwidth and shader count translate into substantial real-world compute advantages in Vulkan workloads. The OpenCL gap of 32.7% is still large, but it is proportionally smaller than the Vulkan gap, indicating the FirePro W7100 is relatively closer in OpenCL scenarios.

Looking at the broader average benchmark scores, the RX 570's 28,766 places it just 0.4% below the Radeon RX 6800M (28,874) and 0.7% above the Radeon R9 M295X (28,580). It is also 0.8% above the Radeon RX 470 (28,996) and 1.2% above the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 (28,421). The FirePro W7100's 25,856 sits 0.1% above the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842), 0.1% below the Radeon R9 M395X (25,891), 0.5% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740), and 0.5% above the Radeon Pro W5700 (25,726). These nearest-rival deltas are all within 1.2%, meaning both cards are tightly clustered with their direct competitors, but the RX 570's cluster sits roughly 2,900 points higher on average.

The FP32 figures reinforce the head-to-head results. The RX 570's 5.095 TFLOPS is 54.6% higher than the FirePro's 3.297 TFLOPS. Texture rate also favors the RX 570: 159.2 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s, a 54.6% advantage. Pixel rate is 39.81 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s, a 35.2% advantage. These compute metrics align closely with the benchmark deltas, though the Vulkan gap of 55.3% is slightly larger than the FP32 gap, suggesting the RX 570's architectural advantages compound in Vulkan specifically.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon RX 570 for any user whose priority is raw compute performance. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 32.7% lead in OpenCL, and a 55.3% lead in Vulkan. Its FP32 throughput is 54.6% higher, its texture rate is 54.6% higher, and its memory bandwidth is 40% higher. It also has more shading units, more TMUs, a smaller and denser die, and a newer architecture generation. The RX 570's average benchmark score of 28,766 places it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, versus the FirePro W7100's 25,856 and 71st percentile.

The AMD FirePro W7100 is the better choice only in specific structural scenarios. It offers 8 GB of memory, double the RX 570's 4 GB, which matters for workloads that exceed 4 GB of working set. It is also single-slot, which fits in denser chassis, and it provides four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs compared to the RX 570's three DisplayPort 1.4a, one HDMI 2.0b, and one DVI. In every recorded compute benchmark, however, the FirePro W7100 trails by a wide margin.

The verdict is straightforward: the RX 570 is the faster card in every measured test, and its compute advantages are large enough that the FirePro W7100's extra memory and single-slot design are the only reasons to choose it. Users who need maximum performance per the recorded data should select the RX 570. Users who need 8 GB of memory or a single-slot professional card should consider the FirePro W7100 despite its lower scores.