FirePro W2100 vs Radeon PRO W7500

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7500 and FirePro W2100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

PRO W7500
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
34.30
+1366%

PRO W7500 outperforms W2100 by a whopping 1366% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking153856
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation100.00no data
Power efficiency33.656.18
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameNavi 33Oland
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date3 August 2023 (1 year ago)12 August 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data

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 cores1792320
Core clock speed1500 MHz630 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz680 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt26 Watt
Texture fill rate190.413.60
Floating-point processing power12.19 TFLOPS0.4352 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs11220
Ray Tracing Cores28no data

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
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x8
Length216 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Form factorno datalow profile / half length
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR6DDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1344 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.0 GB/s28.8 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.12x DisplayPort
DisplayPort countno data2
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.75.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.21.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131

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.

PRO W7500 34.30
+1366%
FirePro W2100 2.34

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.

PRO W7500 13214
+1363%
FirePro W2100 903

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 HD170−180
+1317%
12
−1317%
4K27−30
+1250%
2
−1250%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.52no data
4K15.89no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how PRO W7500 and FirePro W2100 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7500 is 1317% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7500 is 1250% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.30 2.34
Recency 3 August 2023 12 August 2014
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 26 Watt

PRO W7500 has a 1365.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

FirePro W2100, on the other hand, has 169.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W2100 in performance tests.

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 PRO W7500
Radeon PRO W7500
AMD FirePro W2100
FirePro W2100

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.


4.1 17 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 94 votes

Rate FirePro W2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7500 or FirePro W2100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.