FirePro W4300 vs Radeon R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 with FirePro W4300, including specs and performance data.

R9 285
2014
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.11
+131%

R9 285 outperforms W4300 by a whopping 131% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking365588
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.25no data
Power efficiency6.4110.56
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameTongaBonaire
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)1 December 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data

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 cores1792768
Core clock speed918 MHz930 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate102.844.64
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPS1.428 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs11248
L1 Cache448 KB192 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mm171 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/s96 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.24x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.56.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.0
Vulkan1.2.1701.2.131

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.

R9 285 15.11
+131%
FirePro W4300 6.55

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.

R9 285 6680
+131%
FirePro W4300 2894
Samples: 62

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.11 6.55
Recency 2 September 2014 1 December 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 50 Watt

R9 285 has a 130.7% higher aggregate performance score.

FirePro W4300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 280% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W4300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 285 is a desktop graphics card while FirePro W4300 is a workstation 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 Radeon R9 285
Radeon R9 285
AMD FirePro W4300
FirePro W4300

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.


4.2 80 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 41 votes

Rate FirePro W4300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 285 or FirePro W4300, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.