AMD Radeon HD 8750M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is the decisive winner over the AMD Radeon HD 8750M, dominating the only shared benchmark by a 195.5% margin. The WX 4100 is a modern professional workstation card built on GCN 4.0, while the HD 8750M is a legacy mobile GPU from the GCN 1.0 era; the data shows no contest in compute performance, architectural efficiency, or feature support.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is the only rational choice for anyone needing serious compute performance. Its average benchmark score of 6330 places it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 8750M sits at 5970 and the 34th percentile. The WX 4100’s lead is not marginal—it delivers a 195.5% higher Geekbench OpenCL score (17642 vs 5970), which is the only direct head-to-head result available.

For professional workloads, the WX 4100 is a purpose-built workstation card with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, a 96.00 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 1024 shading units. The HD 8750M, by contrast, is a mobile part with only 1024 MB of DDR3 memory, a 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, and 384 shading units. The data indicates the WX 4100 is for users who need sustained, high-throughput compute; the HD 8750M is for basic mobile graphics tasks where the WX 4100’s capabilities are unnecessary.

There is no scenario from the benchmark data where the HD 8750M wins. The WX 4100 also has a full suite of benchmark results across DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, and Vulkan, while the HD 8750M only has a single OpenCL score. If you require a professional GPU with modern API support, the WX 4100 is the definitive pick.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is stark. The Radeon Pro WX 4100 uses the Baffin chip on the GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon HD 8750M uses the Mars chip on the GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink alone explains much of the performance gap.

The WX 4100 integrates 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The HD 8750M has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, with a density of just 12.3M per mm². The newer process node allows the WX 4100 to pack more than three times the transistors while consuming a modest 50 W TDP.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the WX 4100. It features 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The HD 8750M has only 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The WX 4100’s pixel rate is 19.22 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s for the HD 8750M, and its texture rate is 76.86 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The WX 4100 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s. The HD 8750M uses 1 GB of DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) on the same 128-bit bus, but only achieves 28.80 GB/s. This 67.2 GB/s bandwidth advantage is critical for the WX 4100.

API support shows the WX 4100’s newer lineage: it supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The HD 8750M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both are end-of-life products, but the WX 4100 was released on 2016-11-09, while the HD 8750M dates to 2013-02-25.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There is only one direct benchmark comparison in the data, and it is a landslide. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 scores 17642 against the HD 8750M’s 5970. The delta is 195.5% in favor of the WX 4100. This is not a close race; the WX 4100 nearly triples the HD 8750M’s compute output.

The WX 4100’s other benchmark results reinforce its strength. It scores 21018 in Geekbench Metal, 18703 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 3699 in Passmark G3D. Its Passmark compute score is 1475, with DirectX scores of 56 (DX9), 24 (DX11), 22 (DX12), and 16 (DX10). The HD 8750M has no comparable scores in any of these tests, making a full comparison impossible but the available data is unambiguous.

Context from nearest rivals clarifies the WX 4100’s position. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R7 M350 with an average score of 6327, a mere 0.1% difference. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6282 (0.8% lower), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE and GTX 580M both score 6389 (0.9% higher). The WX 4100 sits comfortably in this mid-range cluster.

The HD 8750M’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (0.2% higher) and the Quadro K620M at 5957 (0.2% lower). Its closest AMD competitor is the HD 8730M at 5955 (0.3% lower). The HD 8750M is at the bottom of its peer group, whereas the WX 4100 is near the top of a higher-performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is overwhelmingly faster. Its FP32 throughput is 2.460 TFLOPS compared to the HD 8750M’s 633.6 GFLOPS, and it wins the Geekbench OpenCL test by 195.5%.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The WX 4100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the HD 8750M has 1 GB of DDR3 with 28.80 GB/s. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the WX 4100’s memory type and size provide a massive advantage.

Q: Are these GPUs still relevant for modern applications?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, making it more capable for modern APIs. The HD 8750M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, which are older versions.

Q: What is the difference in their production processes?

A: The WX 4100 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the HD 8750M uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The WX 4100 achieves a transistor density of 24.4M per mm² versus 12.3M per mm² for the HD 8750M.

Q: Which GPU has better texture and pixel throughput?

A: The WX 4100 dominates with a texture rate of 76.86 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 19.22 GPixel/s. The HD 8750M manages only 19.80 GTexel/s and 6.600 GPixel/s respectively.

Q: How does the WX 4100 compare to its direct rivals?

A: The WX 4100’s average benchmark score of 6330 is within 1% of the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (6327), NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE (6389). It is a competitive mid-range performer.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 wins every category where data exists. Its victory in Geekbench OpenCL is the only head-to-head test, but its broader benchmark suite shows strength across the board. It scores 21018 in Metal, 18703 in Vulkan, and 3699 in Passmark G3D. The WX 4100 is designed for professional workstation tasks: its 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer, 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, and 2.460 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it suitable for compute-heavy applications like rendering and simulation.

The WX 4100 also wins on architectural features. It has more than double the shading units (1024 vs 384), TMUs (64 vs 24), and ROPs (16 vs 8). Its 50 W TDP with no power connectors and single-slot design make it an efficient, easy-to-integrate workstation card. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor professional setups.

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M has no benchmark wins in this comparison. Its only score is 5970 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 195.5% lower than the WX 4100. It is a mobile GPU with no slot width, power connector, or display output data. Its 633.6 GFLOPS FP32 performance is a fraction of the WX 4100’s 2.460 TFLOPS. The HD 8750M might suffice for basic 2D acceleration or light legacy workloads, but the data provides no scenario where it outperforms the WX 4100.

In short, the WX 4100 is the clear winner for any professional or compute-intensive use case. The HD 8750M is a legacy part that is outclassed in every measurable way.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 | AMD Radeon HD 8750M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1125 MHz | 775 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1201 MHz | 825 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 384 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 19.22 GPixel/s | 6.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 76.86 GTexel/s | 19.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.460 TFLOPS | 633.6 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.460 TFLOPS (1:1) | — |

| TDP | 50 W | — |

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

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2016-11-09 | 2013-02-25 |

| Launch MSRP | 399 USD | — |