FirePro W5000 vs Radeon R9 380

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 380 with FirePro W5000, including specs and performance data.

R9 380
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.83
+104%

R9 380 outperforms W5000 by a whopping 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking351533
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.171.68
Power efficiency5.727.11
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameAntiguaPitcairn
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)7 August 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

R9 380 has 446% better value for money than FirePro W5000.

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
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data825 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate108.639.60
Floating-point processing power3.476 TFLOPS1.267 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs11248

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
Length221 mm183 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorfull height / full length / dual slotfull height / half length
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s102.4 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
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.

CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+-
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
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

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 380 15.83
+104%
FirePro W5000 7.76

  • Passmark

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 380 6099
+104%
FirePro W5000 2988

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 HD65
+117%
30−35
−117%
4K25
+108%
12−14
−108%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.06
+552%
19.97
−552%
4K7.96
+527%
49.92
−527%
  • R9 380 has 552% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 380 has 527% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Atomic Heart 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Fortnite 80−85
+110%
40−45
−110%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+107%
30−33
−107%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+125%
24−27
−125%
Valorant 120−130
+122%
55−60
−122%
Atomic Heart 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+108%
95−100
−108%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Dota 2 90−95
+107%
45−50
−107%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Fortnite 80−85
+110%
40−45
−110%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+107%
30−33
−107%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+125%
24−27
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+113%
24−27
−113%
Valorant 120−130
+122%
55−60
−122%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Dota 2 90−95
+107%
45−50
−107%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+107%
30−33
−107%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+125%
24−27
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+114%
14−16
−114%
Valorant 120−130
+122%
55−60
−122%
Fortnite 80−85
+110%
40−45
−110%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+120%
50−55
−120%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+109%
70−75
−109%
Valorant 150−160
+117%
70−75
−117%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+133%
18−20
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+106%
18−20
−106%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Fortnite 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Atomic Heart 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+111%
9−10
−111%
Valorant 80−85
+105%
40−45
−105%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Dota 2 50−55
+121%
24−27
−121%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Fortnite 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%

This is how R9 380 and FirePro W5000 compete in popular games:

  • R9 380 is 117% faster in 1080p
  • R9 380 is 108% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.83 7.76
Recency 18 June 2015 7 August 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 75 Watt

R9 380 has a 104% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro W5000, on the other hand, has 153.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 380 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 380 is a desktop card while FirePro W5000 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 380
Radeon R9 380
AMD FirePro W5000
FirePro W5000

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.


4.1
833 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate FirePro W5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 380 or FirePro W5000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.