FirePro R5000 vs FirePro W4300
FirePro R5000
Popular choices:
FirePro W4300
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro R5000 is positioned at rank 272 and the FirePro W4300 is on rank 168, so the FirePro W4300 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro R5000
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W4300
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W4300 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro R5000.
| Insight | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (279mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W4300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W4300 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $150), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 208.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+208.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro R5000 and FirePro W4300
FirePro R5000
The FirePro R5000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 25 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 825 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,647 points. Launch price was $1,099.
FirePro W4300
The FirePro W4300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 930 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,719 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro R5000 scores 2,647 and the FirePro W4300 reaches 2,719 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro R5000 is built on GCN 1.0 while the FirePro W4300 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (FirePro R5000) vs 768 (FirePro W4300). Raw compute: 1.267 TFLOPS (FirePro R5000) vs 1.428 TFLOPS (FirePro W4300).
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,647 | 2,719+3% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.267 TFLOPS | 1.428 TFLOPS+13% |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 48 | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (FirePro R5000) vs 256 KB (FirePro W4300) — the FirePro R5000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro R5000) vs 12 (FirePro W4300). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2.170. OpenGL: 4.2 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 6.
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2.170 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6+10% |
| Max Displays | 6 | 6 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro R5000) vs VCE 2.0 (FirePro W4300). Decoder: UVD vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro R5000) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (FirePro W4300).
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | UVD | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro R5000 draws 150W versus the FirePro W4300's 50W — a 100% difference. The FirePro W4300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro R5000) vs 350W (FirePro W4300). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 279mm vs 171mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 71°C.
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 50W-67% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 279mm | 171mm |
| Height | 111mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 71°C-16% |
| Perf/Watt | 17.6 | 54.4+209% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro R5000 launched at $1099 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the FirePro W4300 launched at $379 and now averages $50. The FirePro W4300 costs 66.7% less ($100 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 17.6 (FirePro R5000) vs 54.4 (FirePro W4300) — the FirePro W4300 offers 209.1% better value. The FirePro W4300 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | FirePro R5000 | FirePro W4300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1099 | $379-66% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $50-67% |
| Performance per Dollar | 17.6 | 54.4+209% |
| Codename | Pitcairn | Bonaire |
| Release | February 25 2013 | December 1 2015 |
| Ranking | #619 | #590 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro R5000 and FirePro W4300
