AMD Radeon 8060S vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 and the AMD Radeon 8060S represent two radically different approaches to GPU design, separated by nearly eight years of architectural evolution. The WX 9100 is a 2017 workstation behemoth built on the 14nm Vega 10 die, while the 8060S is a 2025 mobile-first integrated graphics processor on TSMC's 4nm process. Benchmark data shows a clear generational shift: the 8060S wins both head-to-head tests decisively, yet the WX 9100 still commands a higher overall percentile ranking. The data reveals that raw compute potential and real-world benchmark performance do not always align, making this a nuanced comparison between a legacy pro card and a modern integrated solution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous in favor of the newer architecture. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon 8060S scores 84,626 against the WX 9100's 66,605, a delta of 21.3 percent in the 8060S's favor. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial margin that reflects the 8060S's superior shader efficiency and higher clock speeds. The advantage grows even larger in Geekbench Vulkan, where the 8060S posts 80,483 versus the WX 9100's 54,711, representing a 32 percent lead. This near-one-third performance gap in Vulkan is particularly telling, as it highlights how the RDNA 3.5 architecture handles modern API workloads far more efficiently than the older GCN 5.0 design.

The WX 9100 does not win any of the two head-to-head tests, but its average benchmark score of 64,212 across all tests places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. The 8060S, despite winning both direct comparisons, has a lower average score of 55,757 and sits in the 87th percentile. This discrepancy stems from the benchmarks included in each GPU's aggregate: the WX 9100's scores come from three Geekbench tests (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan), while the 8060S includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2,162 alongside its two Geekbench scores. The 8060S's OpenCL and Vulkan scores are exceptionally high, but the 3DMark result drags its average down relative to the WX 9100's consistent Geekbench performance.

Looking at nearest rivals provides additional context. The WX 9100's average score of 64,212 places it just 0.6 percent ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842) and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830), and 0.8 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693). The 8060S, by contrast, is virtually tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55,698, 0.1 percent delta), while sitting 0.6 percent behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (56,083) and 1.7-2.8 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54,828) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 (54,247). These rival comparisons show that the 8060S competes with desktop-class discrete GPUs despite being an integrated part, while the WX 9100 holds its own against mining and mid-range cards from its era.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is vast. The Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 12,500 million transistors into a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3 million per mm². In contrast, the Radeon 8060S uses the Strix Halo chip based on RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on TSMC's 4nm process with a 308 mm² die; its transistor count is listed as unknown. The process node difference alone — 14nm versus 4nm — explains much of the efficiency gap, as the 8060S achieves higher performance with far fewer resources.

Core configurations differ significantly. The WX 9100 features 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. The 8060S has fewer shading units (2,560) and TMUs (160), but maintains the same 64 ROPs. Critically, the 8060S includes 40 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the WX 9100. Clock speeds tell the story of efficiency: the WX 9100 runs at 1,200 MHz base and 1,500 MHz boost, while the 8060S starts at 1,295 MHz base and boosts to 2,900 MHz — nearly double the boost clock. This clock advantage, combined with architectural improvements, allows the 8060S to deliver higher raw throughput despite fewer cores.

Memory configurations could not be more different. The WX 9100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth with memory clocks at 945 MHz (1,890 Mbps effective). The 8060S relies entirely on system shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the 8060S's memory performance varies with the host system's RAM configuration, whereas the WX 9100 has dedicated, fixed-bandwidth HBM2. The compute output reflects this divergence: the WX 9100 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the 8060S pushes 14.85 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), indicating full-rate FP16 execution on the newer chip.

Power and physical characteristics reinforce the generational gap. The WX 9100 is a dual-slot card with a 230W TDP, requiring a 550W suggested power supply and one 6-pin plus one 8-pin power connector. It measures 267mm in length and 111mm in height, with six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The 8060S, by contrast, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a mere 55W TDP, no power connectors, and dimensions dependent on the portable device it ships in. The bus interface also advances: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the WX 9100 versus PCIe 5.0 x16 for the 8060S. API support shows the 8060S's modernity, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 9100 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3; both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but context-dependent verdict. For raw compute in legacy APIs and professional workloads that leverage HBM2 bandwidth and dedicated VRAM, the Radeon Pro WX 9100 remains a viable option. Its 16 GB of HBM2 with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth is a significant advantage for memory-bound tasks, and its 89th percentile ranking reflects strong overall performance. However, the 8060S wins every head-to-head test, with leads of 21.3 percent in OpenCL and 32 percent in Vulkan. Its 14.85 TFLOPS FP32 output exceeds the WX 9100's 12.29 TFLOPS, and its 2,900 MHz boost clock is nearly double the WX 9100's 1,500 MHz.

The 8060S also offers features the WX 9100 cannot match: 40 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, Vulkan 1.4, and a 55W TDP that makes it suitable for portable devices. The WX 9100 is end-of-life, released in July 2017, while the 8060S is active and launched in January 2025. For anyone building a new system, the 8060S is the logical choice based on benchmark wins and modern API support. The WX 9100's only remaining appeal is its dedicated memory and workstation heritage, but those advantages do not translate into benchmark victories against the newer chip. The verdict is straightforward: the 8060S is the faster and more capable GPU in head-to-head testing, while the WX 9100's higher percentile rank is an artifact of its specific benchmark set, not a sign of superior real-world performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 has a higher average benchmark score of 64,212, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon 8060S averages 55,757, sitting in the 87th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the 8060S in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The 8060S scores 80,483 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 32 percent higher than the WX 9100's score of 54,711. This is the largest performance delta between the two cards in any head-to-head test.

Q: What ray tracing capabilities do these GPUs have?

A: The AMD Radeon 8060S includes 40 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 has no ray tracing cores at all. This makes the 8060S the only option for hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The WX 9100 features 16 GB of dedicated HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth. The 8060S uses system shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all dependent on the host system.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these cards?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 9100 has a 230W TDP and requires a 550W suggested power supply with both 6-pin and 8-pin power connectors. The Radeon 8060S is an integrated GPU with just a 55W TDP and no power connectors needed.

Q: Which GPU supports newer API versions?

A: The 8060S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 9100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro WX 9100 wins in scenarios that benefit from dedicated memory and legacy compute. Its 16 GB of HBM2 with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth provides predictable, high-throughput memory access that system-shared memory cannot guarantee. The WX 9100's 89th percentile ranking and its 0.6-0.8 percent edge over rivals like the NVIDIA CMP 30HX and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 indicate it still holds value in workstation environments using OpenCL or Metal APIs. With six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, it also supports multi-display professional setups. Its 64 ROPs match the 8060S, but its higher pixel rate of 96.00 GPixel/s versus the 8060S's 185.6 GPixel/s shows the newer chip is far ahead in fill-rate-bound tasks.

The Radeon 8060S wins in nearly every modern benchmark and use case. It is 21.3 percent ahead in OpenCL and 32 percent ahead in Vulkan, demonstrating superior performance in current-generation APIs. Its 40 ray tracing cores enable hardware RT, a feature entirely missing from the WX 9100. The 8060S's 14.85 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 output (1:1 ratio) gives it a compute advantage over the WX 9100's 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio) for workloads that use both precision formats. As an IGP with a 55W TDP, it wins decisively in power efficiency and portability, fitting into devices where the dual-slot, 230W WX 9100 physically cannot. The 8060S also supports PCIe 5.0 x16 and DirectX 12 Ultimate, making it future-proof for gaming and AI workloads. Its nearest-rival comparisons place it alongside desktop cards like the RTX 5080 and RX 6750 GRE, confirming that integrated graphics have reached discrete-class performance. For any new build, the 8060S is the clear winner; the WX 9100 only makes sense for legacy workstation deployments where its dedicated HBM2 memory and established driver ecosystem are already in place.