Radeon RX 6500 XT vs FirePro W8100

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W8100 with Radeon RX 6500 XT, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W8100
2014
8 GB GDDR5, 220 Watt
15.24

RX 6500 XT outperforms W8100 by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking324237
Place by popularitynot in top-10096
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data54.77
Power efficiency5.5115.89
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameHawaiiNavi 24
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 June 2014 (10 years ago)19 January 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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 cores25601024
Core clock speed824 MHz2610 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2815 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)220 Watt107 Watt
Texture fill rate131.8180.2
Floating-point processing power4.219 TFLOPS5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16064
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2248 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s143.9 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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.

FirePro W8100 15.24
RX 6500 XT 21.39
+40.4%

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 W8100 6811
RX 6500 XT 9558
+40.3%

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 HD40−45
−57.5%
63
+57.5%
1440p21−24
−47.6%
31
+47.6%
4K12−14
−41.7%
17
+41.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.16
1440pno data6.42
4Kno data11.71

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 111
+0%
111
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 281
+0%
281
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 72
+0%
72
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 84
+0%
84
+0%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 194
+0%
194
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 102
+0%
102
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 107
+0%
107
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 48
+0%
48
+0%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 82
+0%
82
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+0%
34
+0%
Dota 2 145
+0%
145
+0%
Far Cry 5 92
+0%
92
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 81
+0%
81
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 52
+0%
52
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 92
+0%
92
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%
Dota 2 110
+0%
110
+0%
Far Cry 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+0%
54
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Metro Exodus 18
+0%
18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 57
+0%
57
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
+0%
34
+0%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Dota 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how FirePro W8100 and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6500 XT is 58% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6500 XT is 48% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6500 XT is 42% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.24 21.39
Recency 23 June 2014 19 January 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 220 Watt 107 Watt

RX 6500 XT has a 40.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 105.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W8100 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W8100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6500 XT is a desktop 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 FirePro W8100
FirePro W8100
AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT
Radeon RX 6500 XT

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.


3.4 18 votes

Rate FirePro W8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 3461 vote

Rate Radeon RX 6500 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W8100 or Radeon RX 6500 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.