FirePro S9000 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with FirePro S9000, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
8.22

S9000 outperforms 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking548440
Place by popularity28not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.44
Power efficiency42.094.13
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameVegaTahiti
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)24 August 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,499

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 cores5121792
Core clock speedno data900 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rateno data100.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.226 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data112
L1 Cacheno data448 KB
L2 Cacheno data768 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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data6 GB
Memory bus widthno data384 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1375 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data264 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectorsno data1x DisplayPort
DisplayPort countno data1
Dual-link DVI support-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_112 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
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 HD22
−36.4%
30−35
+36.4%
1440p16
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
4K10
−40%
14−16
+40%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data83.30
1440pno data119.00
4Kno data178.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 63
−42.9%
90−95
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 39
−41%
55−60
+41%
Counter-Strike 2 43
−39.5%
60−65
+39.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Escape from Tarkov 30−35
−47.1%
50−55
+47.1%
Far Cry 5 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Fortnite 47
−38.3%
65−70
+38.3%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Forza Horizon 5 33
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Valorant 80−85
−42.9%
120−130
+42.9%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 33
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%
Counter-Strike 2 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 48
−45.8%
70−75
+45.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Dota 2 51
−47.1%
75−80
+47.1%
Escape from Tarkov 30−35
−47.1%
50−55
+47.1%
Far Cry 5 20
−35%
27−30
+35%
Fortnite 31
−45.2%
45−50
+45.2%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Forza Horizon 5 28
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 16
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Valorant 80−85
−42.9%
120−130
+42.9%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Dota 2 48
−45.8%
70−75
+45.8%
Escape from Tarkov 30−35
−47.1%
50−55
+47.1%
Far Cry 5 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Valorant 37
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 18
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 10
−40%
14−16
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
Valorant 90−95
−39.8%
130−140
+39.8%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−40%
7−8
+40%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
Far Cry 5 16
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
−40%
14−16
+40%
Metro Exodus 6
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Valorant 40−45
−39.5%
60−65
+39.5%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Far Cry 5 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and FirePro S9000 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro S9000 is 36% faster in 1080p
  • FirePro S9000 is 31% faster in 1440p
  • FirePro S9000 is 40% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.22 12.09
Recency 7 January 2020 24 August 2012
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 350 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 2233.3% lower power consumption.

FirePro S9000, on the other hand, has a 47.1% higher aggregate performance score.

The FirePro S9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook graphics card while FirePro S9000 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 RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
AMD FirePro S9000
FirePro S9000

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.


3.8 1624 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 7 votes

Rate FirePro S9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) or FirePro S9000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.