AMD FirePro W7100 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs AMD FirePro W7100

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 and AMD FirePro W7100 represent two entirely different eras of GPU design, separated by six years of architectural evolution. The RTX 3090, built on Ampere architecture with a 28,300 million transistor GA102 chip, utterly dominates the aging FirePro W7100, which relies on GCN 3.0 with just 5,000 million transistors. Benchmark data confirms this chasm: the RTX 3090 wins both head-to-head tests, posting a 614.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a 95.9% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. The FirePro W7100, however, remains relevant in its niche as a single-slot, 150 W workstation card with four DisplayPort outputs, while the RTX 3090 is a triple-slot, 350 W behemoth. For anyone needing maximum compute throughput, the RTX 3090 is the only rational choice; for legacy compatibility or power-constrained deployments, the FirePro W7100 still has a place.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 3090 is the superior performer in every measurable benchmark category. Its average benchmark score of 27,565 places it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W7100's average of 25,856 sits at the 71st percentile. In direct comparison, the RTX 3090 delivers 172,758 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the FirePro W7100's 24,182 — a staggering 614.4% difference. The Vulkan gap is narrower but still decisive: 53,927 versus 27,529, a 95.9% lead. The RTX 3090 should be chosen by anyone running modern workloads that leverage DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, or ray tracing, given its 82 RT cores and 328 Tensor cores. The FirePro W7100, with its older GCN 3.0 architecture and DirectX 12 (12_0) support, is only suitable for legacy applications or scenarios where its single-slot form factor and 150 W TDP are non-negotiable constraints. Its four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it a viable multi-display solution, but for raw compute, the RTX 3090 wins outright.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is generational. The RTX 3090 uses NVIDIA's Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung process, packing 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die with a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². The FirePro W7100, by contrast, uses AMD's GCN 3.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die — a density of just 13.7M per mm². The RTX 3090 features 10,496 shading units, 328 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, alongside 82 RT cores and 328 Tensor cores for accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no dedicated RT or Tensor cores. Memory configurations diverge sharply: the RTX 3090 offers 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 936.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 160.0 GB/s. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the RTX 3090 runs at 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost, with memory at 19.5 Gbps effective; the FirePro W7100's memory runs at 5 Gbps effective, with no base or boost clocks listed. The RTX 3090 supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the FirePro W7100 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16. API support also diverges: the RTX 3090 offers DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6; the FirePro W7100 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.2.170, and OpenGL 4.6. Physically, the RTX 3090 is a triple-slot card measuring 336 mm in length, requiring a 750 W PSU and a 12-pin connector; the FirePro W7100 is single-slot, 241 mm long, needs only a 450 W PSU and a 6-pin connector.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available head-to-head benchmarks paint a lopsided picture. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3090 scores 172,758 against the FirePro W7100's 24,182, a delta of 614.4%. This massive margin reflects the RTX 3090's 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus the FirePro W7100's 3.297 TFLOPS — a more than tenfold difference in raw compute capability. The RTX 3090's texture rate of 556.0 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 189.8 GPixel/s dwarf the FirePro W7100's 103.0 GTexel/s and 29.44 GPixel/s, respectively. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3090 scores 53,927 versus 27,529, a 95.9% advantage. This smaller gap suggests that the Vulkan workload is less compute-bound and may benefit from the FirePro W7100's simpler GCN design, but the RTX 3090 still wins decisively. Notably, the RTX 3090's nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839, -1% delta) and AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27,883, -1.1% delta), showing it sits in a competitive mid-high tier. The FirePro W7100's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842, 0.1% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740, 0.5% delta), indicating it is clustered with lower-end mobile and older workstation parts. The RTX 3090 also holds a 73rd percentile ranking versus the FirePro W7100's 71st, though both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 3090 offers 936.2 GB/s from 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, while the FirePro W7100 provides 160.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Does the FirePro W7100 support ray tracing?

A: No. The FirePro W7100 has no RT cores, whereas the RTX 3090 includes 82 RT cores dedicated to ray tracing acceleration.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 3090 has a 350 W TDP and requires a 750 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro W7100 has a 150 W TDP and a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card supports more display outputs?

A: The FirePro W7100 has four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the RTX 3090 has one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RTX 3090 averages 27,565 across all benchmarks, placing it at the 73rd percentile; the FirePro W7100 averages 25,856, at the 71st percentile.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both the RTX 3090 and FirePro W7100 are listed as end-of-life products, with release dates of August 31, 2020, and August 11, 2014, respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3090 wins in every performance category where data exists. Its 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1) performance makes it suitable for general compute, AI inference via Tensor cores, and real-time ray tracing. The 24 GB VRAM capacity, combined with 936.2 GB/s bandwidth, suits large datasets and high-resolution textures, while DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with the latest gaming and rendering APIs. The 82 RT cores and 328 Tensor cores give it a clear edge in ray-traced workloads and DLSS-style upscaling, though the latter is not explicitly benchmarked. The FirePro W7100, while far slower, wins on physical practicality: its single-slot design and 150 W TDP fit into chassis where the RTX 3090's triple-slot, 350 W footprint cannot. Its four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs support up to four simultaneous displays, which may be advantageous for multi-monitor setups in legacy workstation environments. The FirePro W7100's 27,529 Vulkan score, while less than the RTX 3090's 53,927, still indicates functional Vulkan support for older applications. The RTX 3090's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, scores 27,839 with a -1% delta, meaning the RTX 3090 slightly trails that part in aggregate; meanwhile, the FirePro W7100 edges out the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 by 0.5%. For compute-heavy tasks, the RTX 3090 is unmatched in this comparison; for power-sensitive, multi-display legacy deployments, the FirePro W7100 remains a viable, if dated, option. The data shows no benchmark where the FirePro W7100 outperforms the RTX 3090, making the choice clear for anyone prioritizing performance.