RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs FirePro S9050

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S9050 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro S9050
2014
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
11.76
RTX 6000 Ada Generation
2022, $6,799
48 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
68.93
+486%

RTX 6000 Ada Generation outperforms S9050 by a whopping 486% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking46321
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.32
Power efficiency4.0517.81
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTahitiAD102
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date7 August 2014 (12 years ago)3 December 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,799

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 cores179218176
Core clock speed900 MHz915 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2505 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate100.81,423
Floating-point processing power3.226 TFLOPS91.06 TFLOPS
ROPs32192
TMUs112568
Tensor Coresno data568
Ray Tracing Coresno data142
L1 Cache448 KB17.8 MB
L2 Cache768 KB96 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
Length254 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 16-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 amount12 GB48 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth264 GB/s960.0 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 Connectors1x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

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 S9050 11.76
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 68.93
+486%

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 S9050 4901
Samples: 2
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 28715
+486%
Samples: 285

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 HD30−35
−83.8%
185
1440p27−30
−83.2%
161
4K18−20
−83.3%
108

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data36.75
1440pno data42.23
4Kno data62.95

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 210−220 210−220
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180 170−180
Resident Evil 4 Remake 210−220 210−220

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 210−220 210−220
Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180 170−180
Far Cry 5 130 130
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 270−280 270−280
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 400−450 400−450

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 210−220 210−220
Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180 170−180
Far Cry 5 126 126
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 270−280 270−280
Grand Theft Auto V 170−180 170−180
Metro Exodus 114 114
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 489 489
Valorant 400−450 400−450

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180 170−180
Far Cry 5 118 118
Forza Horizon 4 270−280 270−280
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 260 260
Valorant 400−450 400−450

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 210−220 210−220
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550 500−550
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150 140−150
Metro Exodus 95 95
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 450−500 450−500

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110 100−110
Far Cry 5 118 118
Forza Horizon 4 240−250 240−250
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 219 219

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 65−70 65−70
Counter-Strike 2 40 40
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170 160−170
Metro Exodus 90 90
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 184 184
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 95−100 95−100
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50 45−50
Far Cry 5 115 115
Forza Horizon 4 190−200 190−200
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how FirePro S9050 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 517% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 496% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 500% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.76 68.93
Recency 7 August 2014 3 December 2022
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 300 Watt

FirePro S9050 has 25% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 486% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 82% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S9050 in performance tests.

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.


2.2 6 votes

Rate FirePro S9050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 131 votes

Rate RTX 6000 Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S9050 or RTX 6000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.