FirePro D700 vs Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire with FirePro D700, including specs and performance data.

R9 M290X Crossfire
2014
2x 4 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
19.08
+35.7%

R9 M290X Crossfire outperforms D700 by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking304381
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.543.52
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameNeptune CFTahiti
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 March 2014 (10 years ago)18 January 2014 (11 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 cores25602048
Core clock speed850 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors2x 2800 Million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt274 Watt
Texture fill rateno data108.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.482 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data128

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data279 mm
Widthno data2-slot

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed4800 MHz1370 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data263.0 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 Connectorsno data6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 11_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131

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 HD62
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+36.4%
55−60
−36.4%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+52.5%
40−45
−52.5%
Fortnite 95−100
+37.1%
70−75
−37.1%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+42.9%
35−40
−42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
Valorant 130−140
+37%
100−105
−37%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+36.4%
55−60
−36.4%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+38.8%
160−170
−38.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Dota 2 100−110
+38.7%
75−80
−38.7%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+52.5%
40−45
−52.5%
Fortnite 95−100
+37.1%
70−75
−37.1%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+42.9%
35−40
−42.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+42.9%
35−40
−42.9%
Valorant 130−140
+37%
100−105
−37%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+36.4%
55−60
−36.4%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Dota 2 100−110
+38.7%
75−80
−38.7%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+52.5%
40−45
−52.5%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+42.9%
35−40
−42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+42.9%
35−40
−42.9%
Valorant 130−140
+37%
100−105
−37%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 95−100
+37.1%
70−75
−37.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+36.8%
95−100
−36.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+40%
120−130
−40%
Valorant 170−180
+44.2%
120−130
−44.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+45.7%
35−40
−45.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+36.7%
30−33
−36.7%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Valorant 100−110
+44.3%
70−75
−44.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Dota 2 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

This is how R9 M290X Crossfire and FirePro D700 compete in popular games:

  • R9 M290X Crossfire is 38% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.08 14.06
Recency 1 March 2014 18 January 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 274 Watt

R9 M290X Crossfire has a 35.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 month, and 37% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro D700 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is a notebook card while FirePro D700 is a workstation 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 Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
AMD FirePro D700
FirePro D700

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.


2.7 11 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 38 votes

Rate FirePro D700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire or FirePro D700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.