Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) vs FirePro W8100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
W2100 W4100 W4300 W5000 W5000 DVI W5100 W7000 W7100 W8000 W8100 W9000 W9100
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
240 240 OEM 250 250 OEM 250E 250X 250XE 260 260X 265 265X OEM 340 OEM 350 350 640SP 350 Fake Card 350 OEM 350X OEM 360 360 896SP 360E 370 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 430 OEM 435 OEM 450 OEM 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W8100 with Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), including specs and performance data.

FirePro W8100
2014
8 GB GDDR5, 220 Watt
16.29
+480%

W8100 outperforms R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 480% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking361830
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.69no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameHawaiiKaveri Spectre
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 June 2014 (11 years ago)14 January 2014 (11 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 cores2560512
Core clock speed824 MHz720 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)220 Wattno data
Texture fill rate131.8no data
Floating-point processing power4.219 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs160no data
L1 Cache640 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno data

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 x16no data
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus width512 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth320 GB/sno data
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 DisplayPort, 1x SDIno data
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 HD100−110
+456%
18
−456%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 29
+0%
29
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+0%
9
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
+0%
6
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High

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

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 1−2
+0%
1−2
+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 FirePro W8100 and R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) compete in popular games:

  • FirePro W8100 is 456% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 16.29 2.81
Recency 23 June 2014 14 January 2014

FirePro W8100 has a 479.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 months.

The FirePro W8100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W8100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop one.

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 W8100
FirePro W8100
AMD Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
Quadro M4000 Quadro M4000
R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
vs
GTX 460 OEM GeForce GTX 460 OEM
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
P106-100 P106 100
FirePro W7100 FirePro W7100
vs
L40 CNX L40 CNX
FirePro S9050 FirePro S9050
vs
RTX 3060 GA104 GeForce RTX 3060 GA104
FirePro S9150 FirePro S9150
vs
GRID M10-8Q GRID M10-8Q
FirePro S9150 FirePro S9150
vs
Arc A530M Arc A530M
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
R5 (Bristol Ridge) Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
Tesla P4 Tesla P4
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
Plex 2200 D2 Quadro Plex 2200 D2
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
GTX 1650 TU116 GeForce GTX 1650 TU116
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
RTX 3050 4 GB GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB
FirePro W5100 FirePro W5100
vs
GeForce 840M GeForce 840M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.7 21 votes

Rate FirePro W8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 16 votes

Rate Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W8100 or Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.