
FirePro W9000
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 380X
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
FirePro W9000
2012Why buy it
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌1646.3% HIGHER MSRP$3,999 MSRPvs$229 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.5 vs 26.8 G3D/$ ($3,999 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
- ❌26.2% longer card at 279mm vs 221mm.
Radeon R9 380X
2015Why buy it
- ✅Costs $3,770 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $3,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1638.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 26.8 vs 1.5 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs $3,999 MSRP).
- ✅Measures 221mm instead of 279mm, a 58mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
FirePro W9000
2012Radeon R9 380X
2015Why buy it
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $3,770 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $3,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1638.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 26.8 vs 1.5 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs $3,999 MSRP).
- ✅Measures 221mm instead of 279mm, a 58mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌1646.3% HIGHER MSRP$3,999 MSRPvs$229 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.5 vs 26.8 G3D/$ ($3,999 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
- ❌26.2% longer card at 279mm vs 221mm.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
Quick Answers
So, is FirePro W9000 better than Radeon R9 380X?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon R9 380X make more sense than FirePro W9000?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 104 FPS | 78 FPS |
| medium | 89 FPS | 67 FPS |
| high | 73 FPS | 54 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 35 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 91 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 80 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 58 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 33 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 29 FPS | 25 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 18 FPS | 15 FPS |
| ultra | 16 FPS | 13 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 197 FPS | 133 FPS |
| medium | 164 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 86 FPS |
| ultra | 99 FPS | 61 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 137 FPS | 78 FPS |
| medium | 108 FPS | 58 FPS |
| high | 87 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 31 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 75 FPS | 31 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 18 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 13 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 277 FPS | 276 FPS |
| medium | 222 FPS | 221 FPS |
| high | 185 FPS | 184 FPS |
| ultra | 139 FPS | 138 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 208 FPS | 207 FPS |
| medium | 166 FPS | 166 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 138 FPS |
| ultra | 104 FPS | 103 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 139 FPS | 138 FPS |
| medium | 111 FPS | 110 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 69 FPS | 69 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 267 FPS | 135 FPS |
| medium | 222 FPS | 112 FPS |
| high | 181 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 139 FPS | 83 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 200 FPS | 100 FPS |
| medium | 166 FPS | 83 FPS |
| high | 136 FPS | 72 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 58 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 112 FPS | 60 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 47 FPS |
| high | 71 FPS | 37 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 26 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W9000 and Radeon R9 380X

FirePro W9000
FirePro W9000
The FirePro W9000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 14 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 975 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 274W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,157 points. Launch price was $3,999.

Radeon R9 380X
Radeon R9 380X
The Radeon R9 380X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 19 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 970 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,131 points. Launch price was $229.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W9000 scores 6,157 and the Radeon R9 380X reaches 6,131 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W9000 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Radeon R9 380X uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (FirePro W9000) vs 2,048 (Radeon R9 380X). Raw compute: 3.994 TFLOPS (FirePro W9000) vs 3.973 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 380X).
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,157 | 6,131 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048 | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.994 TFLOPS | 3.973 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128 | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro W9000 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 380X has 4 GB. The FirePro W9000 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 768 KB (FirePro W9000) vs 512 KB (Radeon R9 380X) — the FirePro W9000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W9000) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R9 380X). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro W9000) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 380X). Decoder: UVD 3.2 vs UVD 6.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro W9000) vs H.264,H.265,MPEG-2,MPEG-4,VC-1 (Radeon R9 380X).
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 3.2 | UVD 6.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,H.265,MPEG-2,MPEG-4,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W9000 draws 274W versus the Radeon R9 380X's 250W — a 9.2% difference. The Radeon R9 380X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W9000) vs 500W (Radeon R9 380X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 279mm vs 221mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 93°C vs 75.
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 274W | 250W-9% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 2x 6-pin |
| Length | 279mm | 221mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 93°C | 75-19% |
| Perf/Watt | 22.5 | 24.5+9% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W9000 launched at $3999 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 380X launched at $229. The Radeon R9 380X costs 94.3% less ($3770 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 1.5 (FirePro W9000) vs 26.8 (Radeon R9 380X) — the Radeon R9 380X offers 1686.7% better value. The Radeon R9 380X is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).
| Feature | FirePro W9000 | Radeon R9 380X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3999 | $229-94% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.5 | 26.8+1687% |
| Codename | Tahiti | Antigua |
| Release | June 14 2012 | November 19 2015 |
| Ranking | #390 | #394 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













