RTX 5000 Ada Generation vs FirePro S7150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S7150 and RTX 5000 Ada Generation, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro S7150
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
9.79

RTX 5000 Ada Generation outperforms S7150 by a whopping 677% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking45812
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.59no data
Power efficiency4.4820.86
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTongaAD102
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 February 2016 (8 years ago)9 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores204812800
Core clock speed920 MHz1155 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2550 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate117.81,020
Floating-point processing power3.768 TFLOPS65.28 TFLOPS
ROPs32176
TMUs128400
Tensor Coresno data400
Ray Tracing Coresno data100

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 16-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s576.0 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9

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. 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.

FirePro S7150 9.79
RTX 5000 Ada Generation 76.05
+677%

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.

FirePro S7150 3770
RTX 5000 Ada Generation 29288
+677%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

FirePro S7150 27141
RTX 5000 Ada Generation 138081
+409%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

FirePro S7150 29690
RTX 5000 Ada Generation 162637
+448%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.79 76.05
Recency 1 February 2016 9 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 250 Watt

FirePro S7150 has 66.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 5000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 676.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 5000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S7150 in performance tests.


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 FirePro S7150
FirePro S7150
NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation
RTX 5000 Ada Generation

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.


4.2 9 votes

Rate FirePro S7150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 78 votes

Rate RTX 5000 Ada Generation 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.