FirePro W9100 vs GeForce RTX 2050
FirePro W9100
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 2050
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. The FirePro W9100 is positioned at rank #299 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W9100
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 2050
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 2050 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce RTX 2050 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro W9100 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W9100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (16 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce RTX 2050.
| Insight | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (275mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 2050 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $150 versus $200 for the FirePro W9100, it costs 25% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 32.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+32.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅More affordable ($150) |
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 W9100 and GeForce RTX 2050
FirePro W9100
The FirePro W9100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 26 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 930 MHz. It has 2816 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,748 points.
GeForce RTX 2050
The GeForce RTX 2050 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 2944 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 215W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,714 points. Launch price was $699.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W9100 scores 7,748 and the GeForce RTX 2050 reaches 7,714 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W9100 is built on GCN 2.0 while the GeForce RTX 2050 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,816 (FirePro W9100) vs 2,944 (GeForce RTX 2050). Raw compute: 5.238 TFLOPS (FirePro W9100) vs 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2050).
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,748 | 7,714 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2816 | 2944+5% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.238 TFLOPS | 10.07 TFLOPS+92% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 176 | 184+5% |
| L1 Cache | 0.69 MB | 2.9 MB+320% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro W9100 comes with 16 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 2050 has 4 GB. The FirePro W9100 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (FirePro W9100) vs 4 MB (GeForce RTX 2050) — the GeForce RTX 2050 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 16 GB+300% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+300% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W9100) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 2050). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (FirePro W9100) vs NVENC 8.0 (GeForce RTX 2050). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs PureVideo HD VP11. Supported codecs: H.264 (FirePro W9100) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (GeForce RTX 2050).
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | NVENC 8.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | PureVideo HD VP11 |
| Codecs | H.264 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W9100 draws 275W versus the GeForce RTX 2050's 215W — a 24.5% difference. The GeForce RTX 2050 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W9100) vs 300W (GeForce RTX 2050). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin. Card length: 275mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 275W | 215W-22% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin |
| Length | 275mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 93 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 28.2 | 35.9+27% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W9100 launched at $4000 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the GeForce RTX 2050 launched at $150 and now averages $150. The GeForce RTX 2050 costs 25% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 38.7 (FirePro W9100) vs 51.4 (GeForce RTX 2050) — the GeForce RTX 2050 offers 32.8% better value. The GeForce RTX 2050 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2014).
| Feature | FirePro W9100 | GeForce RTX 2050 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4000 | $150-96% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $150-25% |
| Performance per Dollar | 38.7 | 51.4+33% |
| Codename | Hawaii | TU104 |
| Release | March 26 2014 | September 20 2018 |
| Ranking | #328 | #94 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro W9100 and GeForce RTX 2050
