Radeon RX 7900 XT vs FirePro V7900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro V7900 with Radeon RX 7900 XT, including specs and performance data.

FirePro V7900
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 151 Watt
5.41
RX 7900 XT
2022, $899
20 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
69.74
+1189%

7900 XT outperforms V7900 by a whopping 1189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking67720
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data42.63
Power efficiency2.8018.06
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameCaymanNavi 31
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date24 May 2011 (15 years ago)3 November 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$899

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 cores12805376
Core clock speed725 MHz1387 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2394 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)151 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate58.00804.4
Floating-point processing power1.856 TFLOPS51.48 TFLOPS
ROPs32192
TMUs80336
Ray Tracing Coresno data84
L0 Cacheno data2.6 MB
L1 Cache320 KB3 MB
L2 Cache512 KB6 MB
L3 Cacheno data80 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 mm276 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-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 amount2 GB20 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit320 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s800.0 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+
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
OpenCL1.22.2
VulkanN/A1.3

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 V7900 5.41
RX 7900 XT 69.74
+1189%

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 2260
Samples: 80
RX 7900 XT 29117
+1188%
Samples: 7260

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 HD14−16199
+1321%
1440p10−12135
+1250%
4K6−785
+1317%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.52
1440pno data6.66
4Kno data10.58

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 328 328
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 237 237
Resident Evil 4 Remake 307 307

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 262 262
Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 288 288
Cyberpunk 2077 212 212
Far Cry 5 196 196
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 280−290 280−290
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 400−450 400−450

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 170 170
Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 268 268
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 190 190
Dota 2 199 199
Far Cry 5 187 187
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 280−290 280−290
Grand Theft Auto V 173 173
Metro Exodus 146 146
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 483 483
Valorant 400−450 400−450

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 179 179
Dota 2 184 184
Far Cry 5 173 173
Forza Horizon 4 280−290 280−290
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 255 255
Valorant 400−450 400−450

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 206 206
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550 500−550
Grand Theft Auto V 159 159
Metro Exodus 135 135
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 450−500 450−500

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 122 122
Far Cry 5 173 173
Forza Horizon 4 240−250 240−250
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 179 179

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 65−70 65−70
Counter-Strike 2 50 50
Grand Theft Auto V 175 175
Metro Exodus 87 87
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 156 156
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 100−105 100−105
Cyberpunk 2077 60 60
Dota 2 153 153
Far Cry 5 132 132
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how FirePro V7900 and RX 7900 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7900 XT is 1321% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7900 XT is 1250% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7900 XT is 1317% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.41 69.74
Recency 24 May 2011 3 November 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 20 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 151 Watt 300 Watt

FirePro V7900 has 50% lower power consumption.

RX 7900 XT, on the other hand, has a 1189% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 88% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V7900 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro V7900 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 7900 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.


3.6 20 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 2658 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro V7900 or Radeon RX 7900 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.