Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs FirePro V7900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro V7900 and Radeon PRO WX 2100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro V7900
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 151 Watt
5.40
+20.3%

V7900 outperforms PRO 2100 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking660701
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.02
Power efficiency2.769.84
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameCaymanLexa
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date24 May 2011 (14 years ago)4 June 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

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 cores1280512
Core clock speed725 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1219 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)151 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate58.0039.01
Floating-point processing power1.856 TFLOPS1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032
L1 Cache320 KB128 KB
L2 Cache512 KB256 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 2.1 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length279 mm168 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s48 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

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.

FirePro V7900 5.40
+20.3%
PRO WX 2100 4.49

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 V7900 2260
+20.3%
Samples: 80
PRO WX 2100 1879
Samples: 248

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

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.40 4.49
Recency 24 May 2011 4 June 2017
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 151 Watt 35 Watt

FirePro V7900 has a 20.3% higher aggregate performance score.

PRO WX 2100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 331.4% lower power consumption.

The FirePro V7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

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 V7900
FirePro V7900
AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100

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.


3.6 18 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 57 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro V7900 or Radeon PRO WX 2100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.