FirePro S10000 vs GeForce GTX TITAN Z
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX TITAN Z with FirePro S10000, including specs and performance data.
TITAN Z outperforms S10000 by an impressive 96% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 303 | 478 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.15 | 0.25 |
| Power efficiency | 4.40 | 2.25 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK110B | Tahiti |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 28 May 2014 (12 years ago) | 12 November 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,999 | $3,599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
GTX TITAN Z has 360% better value for money than S10000.
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 cores | 5760 ×2 | 4096 ×2 |
| Core clock speed | 705 MHz | 825 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 876 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,080 million | 4,313 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 375 Watt | 750 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 210.2 ×2 | 106.4 ×2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 5.046 TFLOPS ×2 | 3.405 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 48 ×2 | 32 ×2 |
| TMUs | 240 ×2 | 112 ×2 |
| L1 Cache | 240 KB | 448 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1536 KB | 768 KB |
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 support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 305 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 3-slot | 2-slot |
| Form factor | no data | full height / full length |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 2x 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB ×2 | 6 GB ×2 |
| Memory bus width | 768-bit (384-bit per GPU) ×2 | 384 Bit ×2 |
| Memory clock speed | 7.0 GB/s | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 672 GB/s ×2 | 480 GB/s ×2 |
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 Connectors | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort |
| Multi monitor support | 4 displays | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Dual-link DVI support | - | + |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Blu Ray 3D | + | - |
| 3D Gaming | + | - |
| 3D Vision | + | - |
| 3D Vision Live | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
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.
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.
GeekBench 5 OpenCL
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 21.35 | 10.89 |
| Recency | 28 May 2014 | 12 November 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 6 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 375 Watt | 750 Watt |
GTX TITAN Z has a 96% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 100% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX TITAN Z is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S10000 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX TITAN Z is a desktop graphics card while FirePro S10000 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
