AMD Radeon HD 7950 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes a single directly comparable benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench Metal. In that test, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 scores 40,357, while the AMD Radeon HD 7950 scores 33,951. That is a decisive 18.9% advantage for the WX 7100, and it is the only head-to-head result in the database, so the WX 7100 holds a 1-0 win record in direct comparisons.

Context from the broader database reinforces the gap. The WX 7100's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 40,063, placing it at the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. The HD 7950's average score is 33,951, at the 78th percentile. While both sit comfortably above the midpoint of the database, the WX 7100 is clearly the stronger performer in aggregate. The gap in percentile ranking is modest (82 versus 78), but the raw score difference of roughly 6,100 points is substantial.

Looking at the WX 7100's nearest rivals helps calibrate its standing. Its average score of 40,063 is only 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (40,318) and 0.8% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (40,377). It is 1.3% ahead of both the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39,568) and the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39,555). This places the WX 7100 in a tight cluster of modern workstation and mobile GPUs, all within roughly 1.3% of each other in average score. The card is not an outlier in either direction; it sits squarely in the middle of a competitive field.

The HD 7950's nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight grouping, but at a lower performance tier. Its average score of 33,951 is 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 480 (33,997), 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7700S (33,849), 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (34,133), and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154). The HD 7950 is therefore bracketed by a set of cards that all land within a narrow band around 34,000 points. It is competitive with those peers, but that entire cluster sits roughly 6,000 points below the WX 7100's cluster.

The single Metal benchmark, the only test where both cards appear, shows the WX 7100 leading by 18.9%. That is not a marginal win; it is a large enough delta to represent a full performance tier of separation. In practical terms, the WX 7100 delivers roughly a fifth more performance in this workload than the HD 7950. The database does not include matching OpenCL or Vulkan results for both cards, so the Metal result is the only direct evidence, but the average scores from each card's full benchmark history align with the same conclusion.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next design. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The AMD Radeon HD 7950 uses the Tahiti chip built on GCN 1.0, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. That process shrink is significant: the WX 7100 packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The HD 7950 contains 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The newer card nearly doubles the transistor density despite having more transistors overall, and it does so on a die that is roughly 34% smaller in area.

The compute resources differ accordingly. The WX 7100 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operations pipelines. The HD 7950 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The shading unit count is 28.6% higher on the WX 7100, and the TMU count is 28.6% higher as well. The ROP count is identical at 32, which means pixel throughput differences come down to clock speed rather than raw pipeline count. The WX 7100 reaches a pixel rate of 39.78 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s for the HD 7950, a 55.4% advantage. Texture rate tells a similar story: 179.0 GTexel/s for the WX 7100 versus 89.60 GTexel/s for the HD 7950, a 99.8% advantage. Floating point performance doubles as well: the WX 7100 delivers 5.728 TFLOPS of FP32, while the HD 7950 delivers 2.867 TFLOPS. The WX 7100 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (5.728 TFLOPS), while the HD 7950 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The WX 7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. The HD 7950 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, with memory at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for a bandwidth of 240.0 GB/s. The older card actually has a slight bandwidth advantage of 7.1%, but it carries far less capacity. The WX 7100 offers 5 GB more memory, which matters for large datasets and modern workloads. The newer card also uses a narrower bus but compensates with faster memory clocks.

The power profiles reflect the process node advantage. The WX 7100 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W power supply. The HD 7950 has a TDP of 200 W, needs two 6-pin connectors, and calls for a 550 W power supply. The WX 7100 delivers approximately double the FP32 throughput while drawing 35% less power. Physical design differs as well: the WX 7100 is a single-slot card at 241 mm long, 112 mm tall, while the HD 7950 is a dual-slot card at 278 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 38 mm wide.

Display outputs and API support also separate the two. The WX 7100 offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The HD 7950 provides one DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and two mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. For APIs, the WX 7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The HD 7950 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the benchmark data?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 scores 40,357 in Geekbench Metal, 18.9% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 7950's 33,951. Its average benchmark score of 40,063 also exceeds the HD 7950's 33,951.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The WX 7100's average score of 40,063 is 0.6% behind the Radeon Pro 580, 0.8% behind the RTX 5070, and 1.3% ahead of both the RTX A500 Mobile and Radeon Pro 575. The HD 7950's 33,951 is 0.1% behind the RX 480, 0.3% ahead of the RX 7700S, 0.5% behind the RX 560 XT, and 0.6% behind the RTX A2000 12 GB.

Q: What are the main architectural differences?

A: The WX 7100 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. The HD 7950 uses GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm process with 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die. The WX 7100 has 2,304 shading units versus 1,792, and 144 TMUs versus 112.

Q: How does memory capacity and bandwidth compare?

A: The WX 7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 7950 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 240.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 7950 has slightly higher bandwidth, but the WX 7100 has 5 GB more capacity.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The WX 7100 has a 130 W TDP with a single 6-pin connector and a suggested 300 W power supply. The HD 7950 has a 200 W TDP with two 6-pin connectors and a suggested 550 W power supply.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The WX 7100 provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The HD 7950 provides one DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and two mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most use cases. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 outperforms the AMD Radeon HD 7950 by 18.9% in the only direct benchmark, holds a 82nd percentile ranking versus 78th, delivers roughly double the FP32 throughput (5.728 TFLOPS versus 2.867 TFLOPS), doubles the texture rate (179.0 GTexel/s versus 89.60 GTexel/s), and provides 8 GB of memory versus 3 GB. It does all of this while drawing 130 W versus 200 W and occupying a single slot rather than two. The WX 7100 also supports newer display outputs (DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1.2) and a newer Vulkan version (1.3 versus 1.2.170).

The HD 7950 does hold a few advantages. Its memory bandwidth of 240.0 GB/s exceeds the WX 7100's 224.0 GB/s, and its 384-bit bus is wider. It also has a 7.1% bandwidth edge, which could matter in bandwidth-bound scenarios. Its launch MSRP was 449 USD, while the WX 7100 launched at 799 USD. However, the performance gap in the benchmark data is substantial, and the WX 7100's advantages in compute, memory capacity, power efficiency, and modern feature support are decisive.

For a user choosing between these two based on recorded performance, the WX 7100 is the stronger pick. It leads in every compute metric, offers more memory, consumes less power, and ranks higher in the database's percentile distribution. The HD 7950 remains competitive with its immediate peers like the RX 480 and RX 7700S, but it sits a full tier below the WX 7100. The only scenario where the HD 7950 looks preferable is one where its higher memory bandwidth is the dominant factor, or where the lower launch price is a consideration. Otherwise, the WX 7100's 18.9% direct benchmark lead and its broader performance envelope make it the recommended card.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 | AMD Radeon HD 7950 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 4,313 million |

| Die size | 232 mm² | 352 mm² |

| Transistor density | 24.6M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Memory size | 8 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory bus width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 240.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 2304 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 144 | 112 |

| Pixel rate | 39.78 GPixel/s | 25.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 179.0 GTexel/s | 89.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.728 TFLOPS | 2.867 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 5.728 TFLOPS (1:1) | None recorded |

| TDP | 130 W | 200 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 550 W |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan support | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 241 mm x 112 mm | 278 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm |

| Release date | 2016-11-09 | 2012-01-30 |

| Launch MSRP | 799 USD | 449 USD |