FirePro W8000 vs Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) with FirePro W8000, including specs and performance data.
W8000 outperforms Graphics (Ryzen 7000) by a whopping 144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 670 | 428 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 1.16 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 3.31 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2 (2022−2023) | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) |
| GPU code name | Raphael | Tahiti |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 26 September 2022 (2 years ago) | 14 June 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 128 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 900 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2200 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,313 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 100.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 3.226 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 112 |
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 support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 279 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Form factor | no data | full height / full length |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 6-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 type | no data | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1375 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 176 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
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 Connectors | no data | 4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI |
| StereoOutput3D | - | + |
| DisplayPort count | no data | 4 |
| Dual-link DVI support | - | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
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 HD | 17
−135%
| 40−45
+135%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 39.98 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 17
−135%
|
40−45
+135%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
−125%
|
18−20
+125%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Dota 2 | 14
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 23
−139%
|
55−60
+139%
|
| Fortnite | 24−27
−131%
|
60−65
+131%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 11
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
−125%
|
18−20
+125%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−137%
|
90−95
+137%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
| World of Tanks | 70−75
−143%
|
180−190
+143%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Dota 2 | 37
−143%
|
90−95
+143%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
−127%
|
50−55
+127%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9
−133%
|
21−24
+133%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
−125%
|
18−20
+125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−137%
|
90−95
+137%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−33
−133%
|
70−75
+133%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| World of Tanks | 30−35
−134%
|
75−80
+134%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−133%
|
14−16
+133%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−133%
|
14−16
+133%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−133%
|
14−16
+133%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
This is how Graphics (Ryzen 7000) and FirePro W8000 compete in popular games:
- FirePro W8000 is 135% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.44 | 10.83 |
| Recency | 26 September 2022 | 14 June 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 6 nm | 28 nm |
Graphics (Ryzen 7000) has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.
FirePro W8000, on the other hand, has a 143.9% higher aggregate performance score.
The FirePro W8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is a notebook card while FirePro W8000 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
