RTX A2000 vs FirePro V7900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro V7900 and RTX A2000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro V7900
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 151 Watt
5.41

RTX A2000 outperforms V7900 by a whopping 492% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking678196
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data29.58
Power efficiency2.8135.67
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameCaymanGA106
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date24 May 2011 (15 years ago)10 August 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449

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 cores12803328
Core clock speed725 MHz562 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1200 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)151 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate58.00124.8
Floating-point processing power1.856 TFLOPS7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs80104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Coresno data26
L1 Cache320 KB3.3 MB
L2 Cache512 KB3 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 2.1 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length279 mm167 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-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 amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s288.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.8
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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 V7900 5.41
RTX A2000 32.04
+492%

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 V7900 2264
Samples: 81
RTX A2000 13403
+492%
Samples: 1148

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 HD14−1690
+543%
1440p7−8
−83.7%
43
4K4−5
−85.2%
27

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.99
1440pno data10.44
4Kno data16.63

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 95−100 95−100
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 70−75

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 95−100 95−100
Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 70−75
Far Cry 5 108 108
Fortnite 140−150 140−150
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
Valorant 200−210 200−210

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 95−100 95−100
Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 70−75
Far Cry 5 98 98
Far Cry 6 83 83
Fortnite 140−150 140−150
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 120−130
Grand Theft Auto V 129 129
Metro Exodus 60 60
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 117 117
Valorant 200−210 200−210

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 70−75
Far Cry 5 91 91
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64 64
Valorant 200−210 200−210

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150 140−150

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 75−80 75−80
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230 220−230
Far Cry 6 49 49
Grand Theft Auto V 58 58
Metro Exodus 34 34
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 230−240 230−240

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90 85−90
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 35−40
Far Cry 5 61 61
Forza Horizon 4 85−90 85−90
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47 47

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85 80−85

4K
High

Atomic Heart 24−27 24−27
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Far Cry 6 26 26
Grand Theft Auto V 56 56
Metro Exodus 20 20
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40 40
Valorant 190−200 190−200

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55 50−55
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 16−18
Far Cry 5 30 30
Forza Horizon 4 55−60 55−60
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 40−45

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 40−45

This is how FirePro V7900 and RTX A2000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 is 543% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 is 514% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 is 575% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.41 32.04
Recency 24 May 2011 10 August 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 151 Watt 70 Watt

RTX A2000 has a 492% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 80% more advanced lithography process, and 54% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V7900 in performance tests.

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.


3.6 20 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 634 votes

Rate RTX A2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro V7900 or RTX A2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.