AMD FirePro S9000 vs AMD Radeon HD 7610M
Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro S9000 and AMD Radeon HD 7610M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro S9000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 7 month(s) later
- 2x more core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 450 MHz
- 11.2x more texture fill rate: 100.8 GTexel / s vs 9 GTexel / s
- 4.5x more pipelines: 1792 vs 400
- 9x better floating-point performance: 3,226 gflops vs 360.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 6x more maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 1 GB
- 3.4x more memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 1600 MHz
- 8x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5059 vs 632
- Around 17% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 561 vs 479
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3707 vs 2632
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3339
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3707 vs 2632
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3339
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 24 August 2012 vs 7 January 2012 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 450 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 GTexel / s vs 9 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 vs 400 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,226 gflops vs 360.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 6 GB vs 1 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5059 vs 632 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 561 vs 479 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 vs 2632 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3339 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 vs 2632 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3339 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7610M
- 17.5x lower typical power consumption: 20 Watt vs 350 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt vs 350 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD FirePro S9000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7610M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD FirePro S9000 | AMD Radeon HD 7610M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5059 | 632 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 561 | 479 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 9.541 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 275.278 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.886 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.049 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 91.842 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 | 2632 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3339 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 | 2632 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3339 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5257 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD FirePro S9000 | AMD Radeon HD 7610M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | TeraScale 2 |
| Code name | Tahiti | Whistler |
| Launch date | 24 August 2012 | 7 January 2012 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,499 | |
| Place in performance rating | 684 | 685 |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,226 gflops | 360.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 400 |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 GTexel / s | 9 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 350 Watt | 20 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,313 million | 716 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Form factor | Full Height / Full Length | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 264 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |

