Radeon RX 6800 XT vs FirePro S9050

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S9050 with Radeon RX 6800 XT, including specs and performance data.

FirePro S9050
2014
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
11.71
RX 6800 XT
2020, $649
16 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
60.00
+412%

6800 XT outperforms S9050 by a whopping 412% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking46343
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data39.61
Power efficiency4.0515.57
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTahitiNavi 21
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 August 2014 (12 years ago)28 October 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

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 cores17924608
Core clock speed900 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2250 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate100.8648.0
Floating-point processing power3.226 TFLOPS20.74 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs112288
Ray Tracing Coresno data72
L0 Cacheno data1.1 MB
L1 Cache448 KB1 MB
L2 Cache768 KB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length254 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin2x 8-pin

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 amount12 GB16 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth264 GB/s512.0 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

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
Vulkan1.2.1311.2

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 S9050 11.71
RX 6800 XT 60.00
+412%

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 S9050 4901
Samples: 2
RX 6800 XT 25104
+412%
Samples: 8043

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
−82.1%
195
1440p24−27
−82.6%
138
4K16−1892
+475%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.33
1440pno data4.70
4Kno data7.05

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 290−300 290−300
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Resident Evil 4 Remake 180−190 180−190

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 180−190 180−190
Battlefield 5 191 191
Counter-Strike 2 290−300 290−300
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Far Cry 5 143 143
Fortnite 280−290 280−290
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 230−240
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 180−190 180−190
Battlefield 5 183 183
Counter-Strike 2 290−300 290−300
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Dota 2 166 166
Far Cry 5 139 139
Fortnite 280−290 280−290
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 230−240
Grand Theft Auto V 150 150
Metro Exodus 152 152
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 294 294
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 175 175
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Dota 2 145 145
Far Cry 5 130 130
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 230−240
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160 160
Valorant 356 356

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 280−290 280−290

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 450−500 450−500
Grand Theft Auto V 120 120
Metro Exodus 95 95
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 400−450 400−450

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 154 154
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85 80−85
Far Cry 5 131 131
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150 140−150

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 50−55 50−55
Counter-Strike 2 80−85 80−85
Grand Theft Auto V 134 134
Metro Exodus 56 56
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110 110
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 103 103
Counter-Strike 2 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 40−45
Dota 2 122 122
Far Cry 5 95 95
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how FirePro S9050 and RX 6800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6800 XT is 457% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6800 XT is 475% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6800 XT is 475% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.71 60.00
Recency 7 August 2014 28 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 300 Watt

FirePro S9050 has 25% lower power consumption.

RX 6800 XT, on the other hand, has a 412% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S9050 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S9050 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6800 XT is a desktop 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.


2.2 6 votes

Rate FirePro S9050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4700 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6800 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S9050 or Radeon RX 6800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.