FirePro W8100 vs Radeon R9 M470X
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing FirePro W8100 and Radeon R9 M470X. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between FirePro W8100 and Radeon R9 M470X. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
FirePro W8100
Radeon R9 M470X is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M470X is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon R9 M470X here:
Main Specs
| FirePro W8100 | Radeon R9 M470X | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 220 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- Both video cards are using PCIe 3.0 x16 interface connection to a motherboard.
- FirePro W8100 has 4 GB more memory, than Radeon R9 M470X.
- FirePro W8100 is used in Desktops, and Radeon R9 M470X - in Laptops.
- FirePro W8100 is build with GCN 2.0 architecture, and Radeon R9 M470X - with GCN 2.
- Core clock speed of Radeon R9 M470X is 276 MHz higher, than FirePro W8100.
- FirePro W8100 and Radeon R9 M470X are manufactured by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon R9 M470X is 1000 MHz higher, than FirePro W8100.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | − |
| low / 720p | 60−65 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 100% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 55−60 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | 7−8 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 60−65 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Battlefield 5 is 111% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | − | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| FirePro W8100 and Radeon R9 M470X have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 250−260 | 220−230 |
| medium / 768p | 220−230 | 190−200 |
| ultra / 1080p | 180−190 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | 110−120 | 65−70 |
| 4K / 2160p | 70−75 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 210−220 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 36% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
| FirePro W8100 and Radeon R9 M470X have the same average FPS in Cyberpunk 2077. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 100−110 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Dota 2 is 18% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 14−16 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 80−85 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Far Cry 5 is 95% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 14−16 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| low / 720p | 180−190 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 110−120 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Fortnite is 81% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 10−11 |
| 4K / 2160p | 24−27 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 65−70 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Forza Horizon 4 is 103% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | 130−140 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 70−75 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 21−24 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Grand Theft Auto V is 68% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 20−22 | 8−9 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Metro Exodus is 138% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Minecraft is 13% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 43% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | − |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 89% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 85−90 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 16−18 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 121% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 60−65 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro W8100 in World of Tanks is 8% more, than Radeon R9 M470X. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro W8100 | Radeon R9 M470X | |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 2 |
| Code name | Hawaii | Emerald |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 23 June 2014 | 14 May 2016 |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 824 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 6,200 million | 2,080 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 131.8 | 61.60 |
| Floating-point performance | 4,219 gflops | 1,971 gflops |
| Length | 279 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 6000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 320 GB/s | 96 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 466 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Form factor | full height / full length | |
| StereoOutput3D | + | |
| DisplayPort count | 4 | |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | |
| Check Price |