Radeon RX 6850M XT vs FirePro D500
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro D500 with Radeon RX 6850M XT, including specs and performance data.
RX 6850M XT outperforms D500 by a whopping 322% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 435 | 79 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.69 | 18.82 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | Tahiti | Navi 22 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 January 2014 (11 years ago) | 4 January 2022 (3 years ago) |
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 cores | 1536 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 2321 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2581 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 17,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 274 Watt | 165 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 69.60 | 413.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.227 TFLOPS | 13.21 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 |
| TMUs | 96 | 160 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 40 |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 279 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1270 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 243.8 GB/s | 384.0 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 Connectors | 6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
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 HD | 30−35
−363%
| 139
+363%
|
| 1440p | 18−21
−383%
| 87
+383%
|
| 4K | 14−16
−379%
| 67
+379%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 160
+0%
|
160
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 68
+0%
|
68
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 297
+0%
|
297
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 122
+0%
|
122
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 259
+0%
|
259
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 126
+0%
|
126
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 43
+0%
|
43
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 95
+0%
|
95
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 227
+0%
|
227
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 89
+0%
|
89
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 89
+0%
|
89
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 166
+0%
|
166
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 99
+0%
|
99
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 99
+0%
|
99
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 99
+0%
|
99
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 13
+0%
|
13
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 78
+0%
|
78
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 92
+0%
|
92
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
This is how FirePro D500 and RX 6850M XT compete in popular games:
- RX 6850M XT is 363% faster in 1080p
- RX 6850M XT is 383% faster in 1440p
- RX 6850M XT is 379% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.28 | 43.34 |
| Recency | 18 January 2014 | 4 January 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 274 Watt | 165 Watt |
RX 6850M XT has a 321.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 66.1% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 6850M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro D500 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro D500 is a workstation card while Radeon RX 6850M XT is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
