Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano vs FirePro W4000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code namePitcairnVega 10
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 August 2012 (12 years ago)1 October 2017 (7 years ago)

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 cores7684096
Core clock speed825 MHz1156 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1247 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate39.60319.2
Floating-point processing power1.267 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3264
TMUs48256

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 x16
Length183 mm152 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1600 MHz
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/s409.6 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12.0
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.131-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 August 2012 1 October 2017
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 250 Watt

FirePro W4000 has 233.3% lower power consumption.

RX Vega 64 Nano, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between FirePro W4000 and Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FirePro W4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano is a desktop one.


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 W4000
FirePro W4000
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano
Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate FirePro W4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.8 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano 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.