AMD Radeon HD 7730M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs AMD Radeon HD 7730M: The benchmark data unequivocally favors the Radeon Pro WX 3100, which wins the sole head-to-head test and leads in every core specification that matters. The Radeon HD 7730M is a legacy mobile part, and the recorded numbers show a clear generational gap in both architecture and performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are decisive. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7333, while the AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6581. This gives the WX 3100 an 11.4% advantage, a significant margin that reflects not just clock speed differences but also the fundamental architectural improvements between GCN 4.0 and GCN 1.0.

This 11.4% lead is not a marginal victory. In the context of the nearest rivals, the WX 3100's average benchmark score of 7580 places it just 1.2% behind the AMD Radeon 540 (which scores 7673) and 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (which scores 7472). The HD 7730M, with its average score of 6581, sits in a different performance tier entirely. Its closest rivals are the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6554, a 0.4% deficit) and the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6612, a 0.5% advantage), both of which are far below the WX 3100's performance class.

The gap becomes starker when looking at the percentile rankings. The WX 3100 ranks in the 41st percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 7730M ranks in the 38th percentile. This three-point difference might seem small, but the raw scores tell the real story: 7580 versus 6581 is a 13.2% difference in average benchmark score. The WX 3100 does not just win, it wins by a comfortable margin that would be noticeable in any compute workload.

It is importantly the HD 7730M has no Vulkan benchmark recorded, while the WX 3100 scores 7827 in Geekbench Vulkan. This absence of data for the older card is itself telling: the HD 7730M's Vulkan support (version 1.2.170) is present, but the benchmark suite does not include a result for it, likely due to its age and limited modern workload relevance.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the superior product for any task that relies on compute performance, and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M is a legacy part that should only be considered if it is already in a system and the workload is undemanding.

For professional workloads, the WX 3100 is the clear choice. Its 11.4% lead in OpenCL, combined with its higher raw throughput metrics, makes it suitable for tasks like GPU-accelerated rendering, video encoding, and general compute. The HD 7730M, with its 25 W TDP and mobile-oriented design, was never intended for such duties, and its 691.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance is less than half the WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS.

For gaming, neither card is a modern champion, but the WX 3100's DirectX 12 (12_0) support and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory give it a clear edge over the HD 7730M's DirectX 12 (11_1) and 2 GB of DDR3. The HD 7730M is strictly a legacy option for older titles at low settings, while the WX 3100 can handle light esports and older AAA games at reasonable settings.

The WX 3100 also wins on longevity. It was released on 2017-06-11, while the HD 7730M dates to 2012-04-23. The five-year gap is visible in every metric, from process node (14 nm versus 28 nm) to memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s). The HD 7730M is end-of-life, as is the WX 3100, but the WX 3100's architecture is far more modern and capable.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by four full generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses GCN 4.0, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon HD 7730M uses GCN 1.0, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink is the primary driver of the WX 3100's efficiency and performance advantages.

The chip details reinforce this gap. The WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip, which packs 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4 million per mm². The HD 7730M uses the Chelsea chip, with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of just 12.2 million per mm². The WX 3100 crams 46.7% more transistors into a smaller physical area, which explains its higher performance despite a lower raw transistor count per function.

Shading units, texture mapping units, and ROPs are identical on paper: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for both. However, the clock speeds tell the real story. The WX 3100 runs at 925 MHz base and 1219 MHz boost, while the HD 7730M runs at 575 MHz base and 675 MHz boost. The WX 3100's boost clock is 80.6% higher than the HD 7730M's, which directly translates to its 80.6% higher FP32 throughput (1,248.3 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS).

Memory is another major divergence. The WX 3100 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 7730M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering just 28.80 GB/s. The WX 3100 has 3.3 times the memory bandwidth, a crucial factor for texture-heavy workloads and compute tasks. The WX 3100 also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the HD 7730M has no recorded FP16 capability.

The WX 3100 is a single-slot, 65 W desktop card with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The HD 7730M is a 25 W mobile part with no slot width or power connector data, as it is designed for laptops. The bus interface also differs: the WX 3100 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the HD 7730M uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Despite the x8 limitation, the newer PCIe 3.0 standard provides more bandwidth per lane, mitigating the interface gap.

API support follows the generational trend. The WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The HD 7730M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The WX 3100's newer DirectX feature level and higher Vulkan version make it more compatible with modern software.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 has an average benchmark score of 7580, while the AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6581, a 13.2% difference in favor of the WX 3100.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the WX 3100 scores 7333 versus 6581 for the HD 7730M, giving the WX 3100 an 11.4% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 7730M support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but only at feature level 11_1, whereas the WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_0.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The WX 3100 provides 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the HD 7730M provides 28.80 GB/s, a 3.3 times advantage for the WX 3100.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The WX 3100 boosts to 1219 MHz, while the HD 7730M boosts to 675 MHz, an 80.6% higher boost clock for the WX 3100.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes, the production status for both the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M is listed as end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins in every measurable category. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by 11.4%. It wins on average benchmark score, 7580 versus 6581. It wins on every specification that impacts performance: FP32 throughput (1,248.3 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS), pixel rate (19.50 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s), texture rate (39.01 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s), memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s), and memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB).

The HD 7730M's only advantages are power consumption and physical size. It draws 25 W versus the WX 3100's 65 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the WX 3100's single-slot desktop form factor would not fit. It also uses PCIe 2.0 x16, which is an older but wider interface, though this does not translate to a performance benefit.

For desktop users, the WX 3100 is the only rational choice. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory is sufficient for modern workloads, and its GCN 4.0 architecture supports current APIs. The HD 7730M is strictly for legacy systems, such as a 2012-era laptop that needs a GPU for basic display output and light 2D acceleration. It cannot handle modern compute tasks, and its 2 GB of DDR3 memory is a bottleneck for any texture-heavy application.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The process node is 14 nm for the WX 3100 versus 28 nm for the HD 7730M. The WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip, the HD 7730M uses Chelsea. Transistor count is 2,200 million versus 1,500 million, die size is 103 mm² versus 123 mm², and transistor density is 21.4 million per mm² versus 12.2 million per mm².

Clock speeds diverge sharply: base clock is 925 MHz versus 575 MHz, boost clock is 1219 MHz versus 675 MHz, and memory clock is 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). Memory size is 4 GB GDDR5 versus 2 GB DDR3, bandwidth is 96.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s. The bus width is 128 bit for both, but the interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 versus PCIe 2.0 x16.

Compute rates follow: FP32 is 1,248.3 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS, pixel rate is 19.50 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s, texture rate is 39.01 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. The WX 3100 supports FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1), while the HD 7730M has no FP16 data.

Power and physical specs differ: TDP is 65 W versus 25 W, slot width is single-slot versus none recorded, power connectors are none versus none recorded, and suggested PSU is 250 W versus none recorded. Display outputs are 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for the WX 3100, versus portable device dependent for the HD 7730M. The WX 3100 measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the HD 7730M has no dimensions recorded. DirectX support is 12 (12_0) versus 12 (11_1), and Vulkan support is 1.3 versus 1.2.170. The release dates are 2017-06-11 versus 2012-04-23, and the WX 3100 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD, which is not recorded for the HD 7730M.