AMD Radeon 550X vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 550X and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 are both GCN 4.0 parts from the Polaris generation, but they occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape. The data shows a clear performance chasm between the entry-level 550X and the professional WX 5100, yet the smaller card holds its own in a way that invites a closer look at what each was designed to do.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the decisive winner in every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the data, taking both available tests with commanding margins. Its most significant advantage comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 26909 against the 550X’s 8970, a difference that translates to a 66.7% lead for the Pro card. The OpenCL gap is nearly as stark: the WX 5100 posts 24217 versus 8866, a 63.4% advantage. These are not marginal wins; they represent a fundamentally different performance tier.

The Radeon 550X’s only "win" is a subtle one. In the nearestRivals comparison, the 550X has an average benchmark score of 8918, which is 0.6% higher than the WX 5100’s 8863. This is a statistical artifact of the averaging method, as the WX 5100’s score is dragged down by its inclusion of many more benchmark tests, including low DirectX scores. The 550X’s two Geekbench scores are tightly clustered (8866 and 8970), giving it a higher average despite being slower in every direct comparison. This tells a story of consistency versus peak capability: the 550X delivers a narrow performance profile, while the WX 5100 spans from weak legacy API results to strong modern compute scores.

The real differentiation emerges in the specification sheet. The WX 5100 features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, compared to the 550X’s 512, 32, and 16 respectively. This 3.5x difference in shader count explains why the WX 5100 achieves 3.892 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput versus the 550X’s 1,247.2 GFLOPS. The WX 5100 also offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the 550X is limited to 2 GB on a 128-bit bus at 112.0 GB/s. For texture-heavy workloads, the WX 5100’s 121.6 GTexel/s rate dwarfs the 550X’s 38.98 GTexel/s.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the superior performer for any compute-intensive or graphics-heavy task, and the AMD Radeon 550X is a low-power entry point with a narrow but usable capability set. The WX 5100’s 66.7% lead in Vulkan and 63.4% lead in OpenCL are decisive, and its 8 GB frame buffer makes it the only choice for workloads that exceed 2 GB of memory. The 550X’s 50 W TDP and lack of power connectors suggest it was designed for basic display output and light acceleration in compact systems, not serious rendering.

For a professional workstation user, the WX 5100’s 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and 8 GB memory are clear indicators of its intended role in multi-monitor and content-creation environments. Its single-slot design and 75 W TDP make it manageable in a workstation chassis. The 550X, with its dual-slot cooler, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, is more of a legacy or entry-level card. Its 45th percentile ranking versus the WX 5100’s 44th percentile is a reminder that both are mid-pack performers in the broader GPU universe, but the WX 5100 does so with far more headroom.

The launch MSRP for the WX 5100 is 499 USD, which contextualizes its professional positioning. The 550X has no recorded launch price, but its specifications suggest it was a budget-oriented OEM part. The verdict from the data: the WX 5100 for anyone who needs real compute power, the 550X for those who need a low-power card with basic modern API support and nothing more.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the first and most telling comparison. The WX 5100 scores 24217, while the 550X manages only 8866. That 63.4% delta is the kind of gap that changes workflow decisions. OpenCL is a cross-platform compute standard, and the WX 5100’s 1792 shaders are clearly doing the heavy lifting. The 550X’s 512 shaders are a fraction of that, and the result shows it.

The Vulkan test is even more lopsided. The WX 5100 hits 26909 against the 550X’s 8970, a 66.7% advantage. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API, and the WX 5100’s higher texture rate (121.6 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (34.75 GPixel/s) give it a structural advantage that no driver optimization can bridge. The 550X’s 19.49 GPixel/s and 38.98 GTexel/s are respectable for its class, but they are not in the same league.

One notable absence: the head-to-head data does not include the WX 5100’s other benchmark results, such as its Passmark scores. The WX 5100’s Passmark G3D score of 5496 and GPU compute score of 2053 are not compared directly to the 550X, which lacks those tests. This means the official head-to-head record (0 wins for the 550X, 2 for the WX 5100) understates the Pro card’s dominance. The WX 5100’s Geekbench Metal score of 29003 further indicates its strength in Apple ecosystems, a test the 550X did not undergo.

The nearestRivals data provides additional context. The 550X’s closest rival is the WX 5100 itself, with a delta of 0.6%. The WX 5100’s nearest rival is the Radeon R9 M265X at 0.1%, and the 550X appears as its second-closest at -0.6%. This mutual proximity in average score is misleading given the head-to-head results, but it highlights how averaging across different test suites can obscure true performance differences.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 has 3.892 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, versus the Radeon 550X’s 1,247.2 GFLOPS, a difference of over 3x.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card offer?

A: The WX 5100 provides 160.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the 550X offers 112.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. The WX 5100’s 8 GB capacity is four times the 550X’s 2 GB.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The 550X uses the Lexa chip, while the WX 5100 uses Ellesmere.

Q: What is the performance gap in Vulkan workloads?

A: The WX 5100 scores 26909 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 66.7% higher than the 550X’s 8970.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The WX 5100 also has a Geekbench Metal score of 29003, while the 550X has no Metal benchmark recorded.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The WX 5100 has a transistor density of 24.6M per mm² with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. The 550X has 21.4M per mm² with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on GCN 4.0, but they use different physical chips. The 550X is built on the Lexa chip, a small 103 mm² die with 2,200 million transistors. The WX 5100 uses Ellesmere, a much larger 232 mm² die with 5,700 million transistors. This size difference is the root of all performance discrepancies. The WX 5100’s transistor density is higher at 24.6M per mm² versus 21.4M per mm², indicating a more efficient packing of logic.

The WX 5100 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the 550X has 512, 32, and 16 respectively. The WX 5100’s 3.5x shader count directly explains its 3.892 TFLOPS FP32 output versus the 550X’s 1,247.2 GFLOPS. Both support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning the WX 5100 also delivers 3.892 TFLOPS of FP16, but this is not a differentiator in the data.

Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores, so ray tracing and AI acceleration are absent from both. The memory subsystems differ significantly: the WX 5100 uses an 8 GB GDDR5 configuration on a 256-bit bus, while the 550X is limited to 2 GB on a 128-bit bus. The WX 5100’s memory clock is 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), producing 160.0 GB/s, whereas the 550X runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) but still only reaches 112.0 GB/s due to its narrower bus.

The pixel and texture rates reflect these architectural differences. The WX 5100 achieves 34.75 GPixel/s and 121.6 GTexel/s, while the 550X manages 19.49 GPixel/s and 38.98 GTexel/s. The WX 5100’s ROP count of 32 versus 16 explains the pixel rate gap, and its TMU count of 112 versus 32 explains the texture rate gap. Both are single-slot cards, but the 550X is dual-slot, which is counterintuitive given its lower TDP of 50 W versus the WX 5100’s 75 W.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The 550X has a base clock of 1082 MHz and a boost of 1218 MHz, while the WX 5100 has a lower base of 713 MHz but a boost of 1086 MHz. Despite the lower clocks, the WX 5100’s higher core count makes it far faster. The 550X’s memory runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the WX 5100’s runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), but the WX 5100’s wider bus wins on bandwidth.

Memory capacity is a major differentiator: 2 GB on the 550X versus 8 GB on the WX 5100. The WX 5100 has a 256-bit bus versus 128-bit, and its bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s exceeds the 550X’s 112.0 GB/s. The WX 5100’s TDP is 75 W versus 50 W for the 550X, and it is a single-slot card while the 550X is dual-slot. Neither requires power connectors, and both suggest a 250 W PSU.

The bus interface differs: the 550X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the WX 5100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are also different: the 550X has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the WX 5100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The WX 5100 is longer at 173 mm (6.8 inches) versus the 550X’s 145 mm (5.7 inches), and it has a recorded height of 112 mm (4.4 inches) while the 550X has no height listed. The WX 5100 was released on 2016-11-17, while the 550X came later on 2019-03-26. The WX 5100 has a launch MSRP of 499 USD, while the 550X has none recorded. The WX 5100’s predecessor is Radeon Pro GCN and successor is Radeon Pro Vega; the 550X’s predecessor is Polaris and successor is Vega.