
Radeon R7 A10-8750 vs FirePro W2100

Radeon R7 A10-8750
Popular choices:

FirePro W2100
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 Radeon R7 A10-8750 is positioned at rank 281 and the FirePro W2100 is on rank 190, so the FirePro W2100 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 A10-8750
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W2100
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FirePro W2100 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 A10-8750 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $30), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 0.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+0.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 Radeon R7 A10-8750 and FirePro W2100

Radeon R7 A10-8750
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 6 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 856 points.

FirePro W2100
The FirePro W2100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 12 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 630 MHz to 680 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 26W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 851 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 scores 856 and the FirePro W2100 reaches 851 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 A10-8750 is built on GCN 1.0 while the FirePro W2100 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 512 (Radeon R7 A10-8750) vs 320 (FirePro W2100). Raw compute: 0.8192 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A10-8750) vs 0.4352 TFLOPS (FirePro W2100).
| Feature | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 856 | 851 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+60% | 320 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.8192 TFLOPS+88% | 0.4352 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 32+60% | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB+60% | 80 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the FirePro W2100 has 2 GB. The FirePro W2100 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 2 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 draws 55W versus the FirePro W2100's 26W — a 71.6% difference. The FirePro W2100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R7 A10-8750) vs 350W (FirePro W2100). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W | 26W-53% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 65°C |
| Perf/Watt | 15.6 | 32.7+110% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 A10-8750 launched at $250 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the FirePro W2100 launched at $139 and now averages $30. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 28.5 (Radeon R7 A10-8750) vs 28.4 (FirePro W2100) — the Radeon R7 A10-8750 offers 0.4% better value. The Radeon R7 A10-8750 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R7 A10-8750 | FirePro W2100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $250 | $139-44% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.5 | 28.4 |
| Codename | Cape Verde | Oland |
| Release | July 6 2016 | August 12 2014 |
| Ranking | #667 | #910 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.














