FirePro S7150 vs Radeon 680M

FirePro S7150

2016Core: 920 MHz

Radeon 680M

2023Core: 2000 MHzBoost: 2200 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

FirePro S7150

150

3,770

0.0%

3,836

+1.8%

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 S7150 is positioned at rank 315 and the Radeon 680M is on rank 331, so the FirePro S7150 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar FirePro S7150

#116

Radeon Pro SSG

MSRP: $6999|Avg: $1500

100%

#299

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

9410%

#315

FirePro S7150

MSRP: $2399|Avg: $459

100%

#316

FirePro W9000

MSRP: $3999|Avg: $150

98%

#317

GRID M60-4Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $120

97%

#318

Quadro K6000

MSRP: $5265|Avg: $300

97%

#319

FirePro V8800

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $100

97%

#320

NVS 510

MSRP: $449|Avg: $15

96%

#321

GRID M60-1Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $50

94%

#322

FirePro M2000

MSRP: $300|Avg: $50

90%

#323

GRID K280Q

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $50

90%

#324

Tesla K20c

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $500

89%

#325

GRID M6-1Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $100

88%

#326

Quadro FX 380

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

87%

#327

Tesla C2050 / C2070

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $30

87%

#328

FirePro M7740

MSRP: $500|Avg: $500

85%

#329

Quadro FX 570

MSRP: $199|Avg: $15

83%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon 680M

#321

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

849%

#323

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

770%

#324

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

767%

#328

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

698%

#329

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

693%

#331

Radeon 680M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $80

100%

#333

GeForce 730A

MSRP: $60|Avg: $20

100%

#334

GeForce GT 745A

MSRP: $99|Avg: $20

97%

#335

GeForce 710A

MSRP: $35|Avg: $62

97%

#336

Radeon HD 8670D + HD 6670 Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

96%

#338

GeForce MX230

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

95%

#340

RADEON HD6410D

MSRP: $35|Avg: $5

95%

#341

GeForce 820M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

94%

#342

Radeon R7 M465X

MSRP: $150|Avg: $45

93%

#344

GeForce 830A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $30

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Radeon 680M is significantly newer (2023 vs 2016). The Radeon 680M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro S7150 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon 680M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FirePro S7150 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon 680M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $80 versus $459 for the FirePro S7150, it costs 83% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 483.8% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+483.8%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($459)	✅More affordable ($80)

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.

FirePro S7150 Benchmark Check

Radeon 680M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of FirePro S7150 and Radeon 680M

FirePro S7150

The FirePro S7150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 1 2016. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 920 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,770 points. Launch price was $2,399.

Radeon 680M

The Radeon 680M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 3 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2200 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,836 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The FirePro S7150 scores 3,770 and the Radeon 680M reaches 3,836 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro S7150 is built on GCN 3.0 while the Radeon 680M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (FirePro S7150) vs 768 (Radeon 680M). Raw compute: 3.768 TFLOPS (FirePro S7150) vs 3.379 TFLOPS (Radeon 680M).

Feature	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
G3D Mark Score	3,770	3,836+2%
Architecture	GCN 3.0	RDNA 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	6 nm
Shading Units	2048+167%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.768 TFLOPS+12%	3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	128+167%	48
L1 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	2 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The FirePro S7150 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon 680M has 2 GB. The FirePro S7150 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (FirePro S7150) vs 2 MB (Radeon 680M) — the Radeon 680M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Bus Width	64-bit	System
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	2 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (FirePro S7150) vs 12_2 (Radeon 680M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 0.

Feature	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
DirectX	12	12_2
Max Displays	0	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 3.0 (FirePro S7150) vs VCN 3.1 (Radeon 680M). Decoder: UVD 5.0 vs VCN 3.1.

Feature	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
Encoder	VCE 3.0	VCN 3.1
Decoder	UVD 5.0	VCN 3.1
Codecs	H.264,H.265	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The FirePro S7150 draws 150W versus the Radeon 680M's 50W — a 100% difference. The Radeon 680M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro S7150) vs 350W (Radeon 680M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 1mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots.

Feature	FirePro S7150	Radeon 680M
TDP	150W	50W-67%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	241mm	1mm
Height	111mm	—
Slots	1	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	25.1	76.7+206%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon 680M costs 82.6% less ($379 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 8.2 (FirePro S7150) vs 48.0 (Radeon 680M) — the Radeon 680M offers 485.4% better value. The Radeon 680M is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2016).