Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs FirePro D300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro D300 and Radeon PRO WX 2100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro D300
2014
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.20
+113%

D300 outperforms PRO WX 2100 by a whopping 113% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking444643
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.00
Power efficiency4.669.36
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code namePitcairnLexa
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date18 January 2014 (10 years ago)4 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1280512
Core clock speed850 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1219 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate68.0039.01
Floating-point processing power2.176 TFLOPS1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length242 mm168 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1270 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth162.6 GB/s48 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors4x DisplayPort1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.20 4.78
Recency 18 January 2014 4 June 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 35 Watt

FirePro D300 has a 113.4% higher aggregate performance score.

PRO WX 2100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 328.6% lower power consumption.

The FirePro D300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro D300
FirePro D300
AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 29 votes

Rate FirePro D300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 50 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.