Radeon RX 6800 vs FirePro W9100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W9100 with Radeon RX 6800, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W9100
2014
16 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
16.97

RX 6800 outperforms W9100 by a whopping 211% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking36364
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data39.02
Power efficiency4.8016.42
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameHawaiiNavi 21
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date26 March 2014 (12 years ago)28 October 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$579

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 cores28163840
Core clock speed930 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2105 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate163.7505.2
Floating-point processing power5.238 TFLOPS16.17 TFLOPS
ROPs6496
TMUs176240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60
L0 Cacheno data960 KB
L1 Cache704 KB768 KB
L2 Cache1024 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
Length275 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 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 amount16 GB16 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x S-Video1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+
StereoOutput3D+-
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
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 W9100 16.97
RX 6800 52.73
+211%

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 W9100 7098
Samples: 41
RX 6800 22059
+211%
Samples: 4971

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 HD55−60
−68.6%
175
1440p30−35
−70.6%
102
4K18−2062
+244%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.31
1440pno data5.68
4Kno data9.34

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 262 262
Counter-Strike 2 350 350
Cyberpunk 2077 135 135
Resident Evil 4 Remake 322 322

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 198 198
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 349 349
Cyberpunk 2077 115 115
Far Cry 5 197 197
Fortnite 230−240 230−240
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 120 120
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 259 259
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 104 104
Dota 2 145 145
Far Cry 5 186 186
Fortnite 230−240 230−240
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
Grand Theft Auto V 159 159
Metro Exodus 147 147
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 269 269
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 99 99
Dota 2 128 128
Far Cry 5 174 174
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 152 152
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 230−240 230−240

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 175 175
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400 350−400
Grand Theft Auto V 125 125
Metro Exodus 89 89
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 74 74
Far Cry 5 163 163
Forza Horizon 4 160−170 160−170
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120 110−120

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 140−150 140−150

4K
High

Atomic Heart 45−50 45−50
Counter-Strike 2 47 47
Grand Theft Auto V 132 132
Metro Exodus 55 55
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99 99
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95 90−95
Counter-Strike 2 65−70 65−70
Cyberpunk 2077 34 34
Dota 2 102 102
Far Cry 5 91 91
Forza Horizon 4 110−120 110−120
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95 90−95

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how FirePro W9100 and RX 6800 compete in popular games:

  • RX 6800 is 218% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6800 is 240% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6800 is 244% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.97 52.73
Recency 26 March 2014 28 October 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 250 Watt

RX 6800 has a 211% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 67% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W9100 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W9100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6800 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.


3.3 19 votes

Rate FirePro W9100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2454 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W9100 or Radeon RX 6800, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.