FirePro W2100 vs Radeon R9 290X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290X with FirePro W2100, including specs and performance data.

R9 290X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
16.62
+723%

R9 290X outperforms W2100 by a whopping 723% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking305864
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.25no data
Power efficiency4.566.18
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameHawaiiOland
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 October 2013 (11 years ago)12 August 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores2816320
Core clock speedno data630 MHz
Boost clock speed947 MHz680 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt26 Watt
Texture fill rate176.013.60
Floating-point processing power5.632 TFLOPS0.4352 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs17620

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 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorno datalow profile / half length
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s28.8 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-
DisplayPort countno data2
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration++
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+1.2.131

Synthetic benchmark performance

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 290X 16.62
+723%
FirePro W2100 2.02

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 290X 7425
+722%
FirePro W2100 903

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 290X 11717
+980%
FirePro W2100 1085

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 290X 73987
+852%
FirePro W2100 7771

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

R9 290X 140
+840%
FirePro W2100 15

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 HD86
+617%
12
−617%
4K50
+2400%
2
−2400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.38no data
4K10.98no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+2500%
4−5
−2500%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+660%
5−6
−660%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+1167%
6−7
−1167%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+2500%
4−5
−2500%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+660%
5−6
−660%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Fortnite 95−100
+870%
10−11
−870%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+573%
10−12
−573%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+1833%
3−4
−1833%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+467%
12−14
−467%
Valorant 130−140
+237%
40−45
−237%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+1167%
6−7
−1167%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+2500%
4−5
−2500%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280
+536%
40−45
−536%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+660%
5−6
−660%
Dota 2 100−110
+357%
21−24
−357%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Fortnite 95−100
+870%
10−11
−870%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+573%
10−12
−573%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+1833%
3−4
−1833%
Grand Theft Auto V 67
+1240%
5−6
−1240%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+875%
4−5
−875%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+467%
12−14
−467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75
+838%
8−9
−838%
Valorant 130−140
+237%
40−45
−237%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+1167%
6−7
−1167%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+660%
5−6
−660%
Dota 2 136
+491%
21−24
−491%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+573%
10−12
−573%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 44
+267%
12−14
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+263%
8−9
−263%
Valorant 130−140
+237%
40−45
−237%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 95−100
+870%
10−11
−870%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+773%
14−16
−773%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+735%
20−22
−735%
Valorant 170−180
+867%
18−20
−867%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+750%
6−7
−750%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+1267%
3−4
−1267%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+800%
5−6
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+867%
3−4
−867%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Grand Theft Auto V 52
+247%
14−16
−247%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+833%
3−4
−833%
Valorant 100−110
+827%
10−12
−827%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 0−1
Dota 2 84
+1580%
5−6
−1580%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%

This is how R9 290X and FirePro W2100 compete in popular games:

  • R9 290X is 617% faster in 1080p
  • R9 290X is 2400% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 290X is 3100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 290X surpassed FirePro W2100 in all 55 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.62 2.02
Recency 24 October 2013 12 August 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 26 Watt

R9 290X has a 722.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro W2100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, and 861.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 290X is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290X is a desktop card while FirePro W2100 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 290X
Radeon R9 290X
AMD FirePro W2100
FirePro W2100

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.


4.2 460 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 95 votes

Rate FirePro W2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 290X or FirePro W2100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.