AMD Radeon R9 285 vs AMD FirePro W8000

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 285 and AMD FirePro W8000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. 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 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, Geekbench - OpenCL.

AMD Radeon R9 285

AMD FirePro W8000

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 285

Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
Around 2% higher core clock speed: 918 MHz vs 900 MHz
Around 2% higher texture fill rate: 102.8 GTexel / s vs 100.8 GTexel / s
Around 2% better floating-point performance: 3,290 gflops vs 3,226 gflops
Around 84% lower typical power consumption: 190 Watt vs 350 Watt
Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6680 vs 4164
Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 597 vs 528
Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 72.799 vs 64.628
Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 391.399 vs 387.109

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	2 September 2014 vs 14 June 2012
Core clock speed	918 MHz vs 900 MHz
Texture fill rate	102.8 GTexel / s vs 100.8 GTexel / s
Floating-point performance	3,290 gflops vs 3,226 gflops
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	190 Watt vs 350 Watt
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark	6680 vs 4164
PassMark - G2D Mark	597 vs 528
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	72.799 vs 64.628
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	391.399 vs 387.109

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W8000

2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7400 vs 6474
Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3717 vs 3043
Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 2782
Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7400 vs 6474
Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3717 vs 3043
Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 2782

Specifications (specs)
Maximum memory size	4 GB vs 2 GB
Benchmarks
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	7400 vs 6474
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3717 vs 3043
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3357 vs 2782
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	7400 vs 6474
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3717 vs 3043
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3357 vs 2782

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 285
GPU 2: AMD FirePro W8000

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

6680

4164

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

597

528

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

72.799

64.628

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

391.399

387.109

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

6474

7400

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3043

3717

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

2782

3357

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

6474

7400

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3043

3717

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

2782

3357

Name	AMD Radeon R9 285	AMD FirePro W8000
PassMark - G3D Mark	6680	4164
PassMark - G2D Mark	597	528
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	72.799	64.628
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1474.632
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	6.369
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	91.954
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	391.399	387.109
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	6474	7400
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3043	3717
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	2782	3357
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	6474	7400
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3043	3717
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	2782	3357
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	2778
Geekbench - OpenCL		24518

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD Radeon R9 285	AMD FirePro W8000
Essentials
Architecture	GCN 3.0	GCN 1.0
Code name	Tonga	Tahiti
Design	AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
Launch date	2 September 2014	14 June 2012
Launch price (MSRP)	$249	$1,599
Place in performance rating	442	441
Type	Desktop	Workstation
Technical info
Core clock speed	918 MHz	900 MHz
Floating-point performance	3,290 gflops	3,226 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Pipelines	1792	1792
Texture fill rate	102.8 GTexel / s	100.8 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	190 Watt	350 Watt
Transistor count	5,000 million	4,313 million
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI
VGA
DisplayPort count		4
Dual-link DVI support
StereoOutput3D
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	221 mm	279 mm
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	2x 6-pin
Bus support		PCIe 3.0
Form factor		Full Height / Full Length
API support
DirectX	12	12.0 (11_1)
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
Vulkan
Memory
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bandwidth	176.0 GB / s	176 GB / s
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	5500 MHz	5500 MHz
Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Technologies
HD3D
LiquidVR
TressFX
TrueAudio
Unified Video Decoder (UVD)