Radeon RX 6400 vs FirePro W9100
Radeon RX 6400
Popular choices:
FirePro W9100
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon RX 6400
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W9100
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX 6400 is significantly newer (2022 vs 2014). The Radeon RX 6400 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 0.3% 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 Radeon RX 6400.
| Insight | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (275mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon RX 6400 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $139 versus $200 for the FirePro W9100, it costs 31% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 43.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+43.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($139) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
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 RX 6400 and FirePro W9100
Radeon RX 6400
The Radeon RX 6400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 19 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1923 MHz to 2321 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 53W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,728 points. Launch price was $159.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon RX 6400 scores 7,728 and the FirePro W9100 reaches 7,748 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon RX 6400 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the FirePro W9100 uses GCN 2.0, both on 6 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 768 (Radeon RX 6400) vs 2,816 (FirePro W9100). Raw compute: 3.565 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6400) vs 5.238 TFLOPS (FirePro W9100).
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,728 | 7,748 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 2816+267% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.565 TFLOPS | 5.238 TFLOPS+47% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 48 | 176+267% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 704 KB+175% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6400 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The FirePro W9100 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 3 (Native) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon RX 6400 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro W9100 has 16 GB. The FirePro W9100 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 16 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Radeon RX 6400) vs 12 (FirePro W9100). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 6.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 6+200% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Radeon RX 6400) vs VCE 2.0 (FirePro W9100). Decoder: VCN 3.0 (Limited) vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Decode),HEVC (Decode) (Radeon RX 6400) vs H.264 (FirePro W9100).
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | VCN 3.0 (Limited) | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 (Decode),HEVC (Decode) | H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon RX 6400 draws 53W versus the FirePro W9100's 275W — a 135.4% difference. The Radeon RX 6400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon RX 6400) vs 350W (FirePro W9100). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 172mm vs 275mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 93.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 53W-81% | 275W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 172mm | 275mm |
| Height | 112mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-19% | 93 |
| Perf/Watt | 145.8+417% | 28.2 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6400 launched at $159 MSRP and currently averages $139, while the FirePro W9100 launched at $4000 and now averages $200. The Radeon RX 6400 costs 30.5% less ($61 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 55.6 (Radeon RX 6400) vs 38.7 (FirePro W9100) — the Radeon RX 6400 offers 43.7% better value. The Radeon RX 6400 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon RX 6400 | FirePro W9100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $159-96% | $4000 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $139-31% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 55.6+44% | 38.7 |
| Codename | Navi 24 | Hawaii |
| Release | January 19 2022 | March 26 2014 |
| Ranking | #330 | #328 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon RX 6400 and FirePro W9100
