Radeon RX 6850M XT vs FirePro S9000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S9000 with Radeon RX 6850M XT, including specs and performance data.

FirePro S9000
2012, $2,499
6 GB GDDR5, 350 Watt
12.07

6850M XT outperforms S9000 by a whopping 245% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking463109
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.43no data
Power efficiency4.1819.69
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTahitiNavi 22
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date24 August 2012 (14 years ago)4 January 2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores17922560
Core clock speed900 MHz2321 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2581 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)350 Watt165 Watt
Texture fill rate100.8413.0
Floating-point processing power3.226 TFLOPS13.21 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs112160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40
L0 Cacheno data640 KB
L1 Cache448 KB512 KB
L2 Cache768 KB3 MB
L3 Cacheno data96 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB12 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth264 GB/s384.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DisplayPortNo outputs
DisplayPort count1no data
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FirePro S9000 12.07
RX 6850M XT 41.67
+245%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro S9000 5059
Samples: 6
RX 6850M XT 17470
+245%
Samples: 87

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD35−40
−74.5%
137
1440p24−2785
+254%
4K16−1857
+256%

Cost per frame, $

1080p71.40no data
1440p104.13no data
4K156.19no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 230−240 230−240
Cyberpunk 2077 160 160
Hogwarts Legacy 100−110 100−110
Resident Evil 4 Remake 110−120 110−120

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 230−240 230−240
Cyberpunk 2077 136 136
Far Cry 5 109 109
Fortnite 180−190 180−190
Forza Horizon 4 160−170 160−170
Hogwarts Legacy 100−110 100−110
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170 160−170
Valorant 240−250 240−250

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 230−240 230−240
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 106 106
Dota 2 113 113
Far Cry 5 105 105
Fortnite 180−190 180−190
Forza Horizon 4 160−170 160−170
Grand Theft Auto V 126 126
Hogwarts Legacy 100−110 100−110
Metro Exodus 116 116
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170 160−170
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 198 198
Valorant 240−250 240−250

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 87 87
Dota 2 95 95
Far Cry 5 102 102
Forza Horizon 4 160−170 160−170
Hogwarts Legacy 100−110 100−110
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170 160−170
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 122 122
Valorant 240−250 240−250

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 180−190 180−190

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 290−300 290−300
Grand Theft Auto V 89 89
Metro Exodus 68 68
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 280−290 280−290

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110 100−110
Cyberpunk 2077 55 55
Far Cry 5 99 99
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 120−130
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55 50−55
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85 80−85

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 110−120 110−120

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55 50−55
Grand Theft Auto V 99 99
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30 27−30
Metro Exodus 35−40 35−40
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72 72
Valorant 250−260 250−260

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70 65−70
Counter-Strike 2 50−55 50−55
Cyberpunk 2077 26 26
Dota 2 78 78
Far Cry 5 68 68
Forza Horizon 4 80−85 80−85
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30 27−30
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65 60−65

4K
Epic

Fortnite 55−60 55−60

This is how FirePro S9000 and RX 6850M XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6850M XT is 291% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6850M XT is 254% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6850M XT is 256% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.07 41.67
Recency 24 August 2012 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 350 Watt 165 Watt

RX 6850M XT has a 245% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 53% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6850M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S9000 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S9000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6850M XT is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.7 7 votes

Rate FirePro S9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 259 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6850M XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S9000 or Radeon RX 6850M XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.