Radeon 530 vs FirePro S10000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S10000 with Radeon 530, including specs and performance data.

S10000
2012, $3,599
6 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
10.85
+339%

S10000 outperforms 530 by a whopping 339% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking467881
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.25no data
Power efficiency2.233.80
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameTahitiWeston
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date12 November 2012 (13 years ago)18 April 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores4096 ×2384
Core clock speed825 MHz730 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHz1024 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate106.4 ×224.58
Floating-point processing power3.405 TFLOPS ×20.7864 TFLOPS
ROPs32 ×28
TMUs112 ×224
L1 Cache448 KB96 KB
L2 Cache768 KB128 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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length305 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-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 typeGDDR5DDR3/GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB ×24 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit ×264 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth480 GB/s ×214.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

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.

S10000 10.85
+339%
Radeon 530 2.47

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.

S10000 4537
+339%
Samples: 8
Radeon 530 1034
Samples: 735

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.

S10000 30631
+511%
Radeon 530 5015

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 HD70−75
+338%
16
−338%

Cost per frame, $

1080p51.41no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Fortnite 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20
+0%
20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 36
+0%
36
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Fortnite 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12
+0%
12
+0%
Metro Exodus 4
+0%
4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
+0%
6
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how S10000 and Radeon 530 compete in popular games:

  • S10000 is 338% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 51 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.85 2.47
Recency 12 November 2012 18 April 2017
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 50 Watt

S10000 has a 339% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Radeon 530, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and 1400% lower power consumption.

The FirePro S10000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 530 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S10000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 530 is a notebook 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 40 votes

Rate FirePro S10000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 807 votes

Rate Radeon 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S10000 or Radeon 530, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.