Radeon 780M vs FirePro W9100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W9100 with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W9100
2014
16 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
18.53
+12.8%

W9100 outperforms 780M by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking331362
Place by popularitynot in top-10032
Power efficiency5.1984.34
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameHawaiiPhoenix
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date26 March 2014 (12 years ago)31 January 2024 (2 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 cores2816768
Core clock speed930 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2900 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate163.7139.2
Floating-point processing power5.238 TFLOPS8.909 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs17648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cache704 KB256 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB2 MB

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 x8
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount16 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth320 GB/sno data
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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoMotherboard Dependent
StereoOutput3D+-
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API and SDK support

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
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Synthetic benchmarks

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 W9100 18.53
+12.8%
Radeon 780M 16.43

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 W9100 7747
+13.6%
Samples: 39
Radeon 780M 6819
Samples: 10946

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 HD35−40
+0%
35
+0%
1440p27−30
+12.5%
24
−12.5%
4K14−16
+0%
14
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
+0%
39
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 25
+0%
25
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 82
+0%
82
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 31
+0%
31
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65
+0%
65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
+0%
18
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21
+0%
21
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how FirePro W9100 and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • FirePro W9100 is 13% faster in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.53 16.43
Recency 26 March 2014 31 January 2024
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 15 Watt

FirePro W9100 has a 13% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 780M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 4900% lower power consumption.

The FirePro W9100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 780M in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W9100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 780M is a desktop one.

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.


3.3 19 votes

Rate FirePro W9100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 2669 votes

Rate Radeon 780M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W9100 or Radeon 780M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.