AMD Radeon 880M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Radeon 880M dominates the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 in every recorded head-to-head comparison. The two shared benchmark tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, show a massive generational gap that leaves no doubt about which part is faster.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon 880M scores 31,285 points against 7,333 for the Radeon Pro WX 3100. That is a 326.6% advantage, meaning the 880M delivers more than four times the raw compute throughput in this workload. The gap is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan, where the 880M records 40,006 points versus 7,827 for the Pro WX 3100, a 411.1% lead. This is not a marginal victory; the 880M is in a different performance class entirely.

The 880M's average benchmark score of 8,436 places it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its closest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, which scores 8,427 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 at 8,458 (0.3% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M at 8,462 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X at 8,325 (1.3% behind). The 880M sits squarely in the middle of this cluster, trading places with older discrete mobile parts.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100, by contrast, averages 7,580 and sits in the 41st percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 at 7,557 (0.3% behind), the Intel Arc A310 at 7,550 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon 540 at 7,673 (1.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 at 7,472 (1.4% behind). The Pro WX 3100 is competitive with these older or lower-end parts, but it is nowhere near the 880M.

Looking beyond the shared tests, the 880M's other recorded benchmarks reinforce its standing. It scores 7,615 in Passmark G3D, 3,719 in Passmark GPU Compute, 969 in Passmark G2D, 97 in Passmark DirectX 9, 73 in Passmark DirectX 11, 32 in Passmark DirectX 12, and 31 in Passmark DirectX 10. It also records 535 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The Pro WX 3100 has no corresponding scores in these tests, so direct comparison is not possible, but the existing head-to-head results are decisive.

The win count is 2 for the 880M and 0 for the Pro WX 3100. Every metric that can be compared directly favors the newer part.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon 880M is the faster GPU in every shared benchmark, with margins between 326.6% and 411.1%. Anyone choosing between these two for compute or graphics workloads should select the 880M unless they specifically need the Pro WX 3100's discrete form factor, dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory, or its professional driver lineage.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100 is an end-of-life product from 2017, built on a 14 nm process with GCN 4.0 architecture. Its 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs are dwarfed by the 880M's 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The 880M also boosts to 2900 MHz versus 1219 MHz for the Pro WX 3100, and its FP32 throughput of 4.454 TFLOPS is roughly 3.5 times the Pro WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS.

The Pro WX 3100 does have advantages that matter in specific contexts. It offers 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the 880M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent. The Pro WX 3100 is a single-slot card with DisplayPort outputs, making it a straightforward drop-in for workstation builds. The 880M is an integrated GPU whose display outputs are portable device dependent.

For raw performance, the 880M wins. For dedicated memory and workstation integration, the Pro WX 3100 retains a niche. The 880M's 15 W TDP against the Pro WX 3100's 65 W TDP also makes it far more power-efficient, though the Pro WX 3100's suggested PSU of 250 W indicates modest system power requirements. The Pro WX 3100 launched at 199 USD, but pricing should not be the deciding factor here.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M scores 31,285 versus 7,333 for the Radeon Pro WX 3100, a 326.6% advantage.

Q: How much larger is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The 880M scores 40,006 in Geekbench Vulkan against 7,827 for the Pro WX 3100, which is 411.1% ahead.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 3100 have any benchmark wins over the 880M?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the 880M wins both tests. The win count is 2 for the 880M and 0 for the Pro WX 3100.

Q: How does the 880M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 880M's average score of 8,436 puts it 0.1% ahead of the GTX 675MX, 0.3% behind the MX330, 0.3% behind the HD 8870M, and 1.3% ahead of the R9 M375X.

Q: How does the Pro WX 3100 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Pro WX 3100's average score of 7,580 puts it 0.3% ahead of the R7 250, 0.4% ahead of the Arc A310, 1.2% behind the Radeon 540, and 1.4% ahead of the GTX 1650.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The 880M uses system-shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, while the Pro WX 3100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The 880M is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, while the Pro WX 3100 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. Transistor density is 145.9M per mm² for the 880M versus 21.4M per mm² for the Pro WX 3100.

Clock speeds favor the 880M heavily. The 880M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Pro WX 3100 has a base clock of 925 MHz and a boost clock of 1219 MHz. The Pro WX 3100's memory runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the 880M's memory is system shared.

Compute resources differ significantly. The 880M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 3100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores. Pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s for the 880M versus 19.50 GPixel/s for the Pro WX 3100. Texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 4.454 TFLOPS versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS, and FP16 is 4.454 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The 880M has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Pro WX 3100 has a 65 W TDP, is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 250 W, and a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The Pro WX 3100 measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The 880M has no listed dimensions.

API support differs as well. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Pro WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the 880M, while the Pro WX 3100 offers 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Release dates and status differ. The 880M was released on 2024-07-14 and is active, with a predecessor of Navi II IGP. The Pro WX 3100 was released on 2017-06-11 and is end-of-life, with a predecessor of Radeon Pro GCN and a successor of Radeon Pro Vega. The Pro WX 3100 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD; the 880M has no listed launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The 880M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Pro WX 3100 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process. The 880M belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point mobile, while the Pro WX 3100 belongs to the Radeon Pro Polaris WX x100 generation.

The 880M's chip is Strix Point, a modern APU design that integrates the GPU with the CPU on the same package. The Pro WX 3100's chip is Lexa, a discrete Polaris-based GPU. This fundamental difference explains the memory architecture: the 880M shares system memory, while the Pro WX 3100 has its own 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer.

Ray tracing support is exclusive to the 880M, which has 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 3100 has none. This makes the 880M compatible with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro WX 3100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support also differs, with the 880M at version 1.4 and the Pro WX 3100 at version 1.3.

The 880M's boost clock of 2900 MHz is exceptionally high for an integrated GPU, enabled by the 4 nm process. The Pro WX 3100's 1219 MHz boost is typical of older discrete Polaris parts. The 880M's 34,000 million transistors versus 2,200 million for the Pro WX 3100 reflects both the process advantage and the larger scope of the Strix Point die.

The 880M has no tensor cores listed, and neither does the Pro WX 3100. Both GPUs support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so there is no dedicated half-precision acceleration on either part.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 880M wins in raw performance across every shared benchmark. Its 326.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and 411.1% lead in Geekbench Vulkan make it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks such as machine learning inference, OpenCL compute workloads, Vulkan-based games, and general 3D rendering. The 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 4.454 TFLOPS of FP16 performance position it well ahead of the Pro WX 3100 for any workload that scales with shading units and clock speed.

The 880M also wins on efficiency. Its 15 W TDP against 65 W TDP means it delivers far more performance per watt, making it suitable for portable devices where thermal and power budgets are tight. The 880M's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and DirectX 12 Ultimate support future-proof it for modern APIs and ray-traced content. Its 12 ray tracing cores open up features the Pro WX 3100 cannot access.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins in specific workstation scenarios. Its 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth is not dependent on system memory performance, which can be an advantage in applications that need consistent memory latency and capacity isolation. The Pro WX 3100's single-slot form factor and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it easy to integrate into existing desktop workstation builds with multiple monitors.

The Pro WX 3100's 512 shading units and 32 TMUs are modest, but its 16 ROPs match the 880M's ROP count, so pixel throughput in ROP-bound tasks is less of a differentiator. The Pro WX 3100's 19.50 GPixel/s pixel rate is less than half the 880M's 46.40 GPixel/s, however.

For users with an existing PCIe 3.0 system, the Pro WX 3100 is a plug-and-play discrete option. For users building a new Strix Point mobile system, the 880M is already integrated and requires no additional hardware. The 880M's 43rd percentile ranking versus the Pro WX 3100's 41st percentile also shows that the 880M sits higher in the overall GPU distribution, despite both being mid-pack parts.

In short, the 880M wins on performance, efficiency, features, and API support. The Pro WX 3100 wins only in dedicated memory and discrete workstation integration. The benchmark data makes the 880M the superior choice for virtually all compute and graphics workloads.