FirePro W8100 vs Radeon R9 290X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290X with FirePro W8100, including specs and performance data.

R9 290X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
19.23
+2%

R9 290X outperforms FirePro W8100 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking272277
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.117.11
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameHawaii XTHawaii
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 October 2013 (10 years ago)23 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data
Current price$20 (0x MSRP)$590

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 290X has 42% better value for money than FirePro W8100.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores28162560
Core clock speedno data824 MHz
Boost clock speed947 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt220 Watt
Texture fill rate176.0131.8
Floating-point performance5,632 gflops4,219 gflops

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 x16
Length275 mm279 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s320 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 DisplayPort4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI
Eyefinity+no data
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support+no data
StereoOutput3Dno data1
DisplayPort countno data4
Dual-link DVI supportno data1
HD сomponent video outputno data1

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D+no data
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune-no data
TressFX1no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore-no data
UVD+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle-no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R9 290X 19.23
+2%
FirePro W8100 18.85

Radeon R9 290X outperforms FirePro W8100 by 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 290X 7425
+2%
FirePro W8100 7279

Radeon R9 290X outperforms FirePro W8100 by 2% in Passmark.

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 HD91
+7.1%
85−90
−7.1%
4K54
+8%
50−55
−8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+10%
30−33
−10%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+5%
60−65
−5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+4%
50−55
−4%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+3.5%
85−90
−3.5%
Hitman 3 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+8.6%
70−75
−8.6%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+6.7%
60−65
−6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+3.3%
60−65
−3.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+5.5%
55−60
−5.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+10%
30−33
−10%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+5%
60−65
−5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+4%
50−55
−4%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+3.5%
85−90
−3.5%
Hitman 3 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+8.6%
70−75
−8.6%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+6.7%
60−65
−6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+3.3%
60−65
−3.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75
+7.1%
70−75
−7.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+5.5%
55−60
−5.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+10%
30−33
−10%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+3.5%
85−90
−3.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+8.6%
70−75
−8.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+3.3%
60−65
−3.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+5.5%
55−60
−5.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Hitman 3 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Hitman 3 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%

This is how R9 290X and FirePro W8100 compete in popular games:

  • R9 290X is 7% faster in 1080p
  • R9 290X is 8% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.23 18.85
Recency 24 October 2013 23 June 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 220 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 290X and FirePro W8100.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290X is a desktop card while FirePro W8100 is a workstation 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 Radeon R9 290X
Radeon R9 290X
AMD FirePro W8100
FirePro W8100

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.


4.1 435 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 15 votes

Rate FirePro W8100 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.