AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs AMD FirePro S9050
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 and AMD FirePro S9050 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: GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 225 Watt
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8870 vs 7062
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8870 vs 7062
- Around 59% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 585 vs 369
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 14 November 2018 vs 7 August 2014 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 225 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8870 vs 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8870 vs 7062 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 585 vs 369 |
Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro S9050
- 3x more core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 2.3x more memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 2400 MHz
- Around 75% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6260 vs 3586
- Around 75% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6260 vs 3586
- 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 13032 vs 3359
- 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 13032 vs 3359
- Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4901 vs 4809
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 2400 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6260 vs 3586 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6260 vs 3586 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 13032 vs 3359 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 13032 vs 3359 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4901 vs 4809 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
GPU 2: AMD FirePro S9050
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 | AMD FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8870 | 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8870 | 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3586 | 6260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3586 | 6260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 13032 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 13032 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 22421 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 585 | 369 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4809 | 4901 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 68.324 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1463.376 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.491 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.133 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 344.551 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 | AMD FirePro S9050 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Vega 12 | Tahiti |
| Launch date | 14 November 2018 | 7 August 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 367 | 366 |
| Type | Workstation | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1190 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Floating-point performance | 3,226 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 1792 | |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 GTexel / s | |
| Transistor count | 4,313 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Form factor | Full Height / Full Length | |
| Length | 254 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
| Memory clock speed | 2400 MHz | 5500 MHz |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 264 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
