AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins every single recorded head-to-head test against the AMD Radeon Pro 450. Across three Geekbench workloads, the WX 5100 posts scores that are roughly 2.2 to 2.7 times higher than the Pro 450. There is no workload category where the Pro 450 comes out ahead.

For users running Metal-accelerated applications, the WX 5100 delivers 29,003 points versus 12,893 points for the Pro 450. That is a 55.5% margin in favor of the WX 5100. OpenCL workloads show the same pattern: 24,217 points for the WX 5100 versus 9,002 points for the Pro 450, a 62.8% gap. Vulkan performance follows with 26,909 points versus 10,518 points, a 60.9% difference.

The Pro 450's role is therefore limited to lighter workloads where its 35 W power envelope and compact MXM module form factor fit into portable systems. It offers 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. That is sufficient for modest 3D tasks, but the recorded scores place it at the 49th percentile among all GPUs, which is actually higher than the WX 5100's 44th percentile ranking despite the WX 5100's much higher raw scores.

The WX 5100, by contrast, is built for sustained professional work. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, double that of the Pro 450. It also has a full-height single-slot design with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a natural fit for multi-display workstation setups.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 29,003 points, which is 55.5% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 450's 12,893 points.

Q: How big is the gap in OpenCL performance?

A: The WX 5100 scores 24,217 points, while the Pro 450 scores 9,002 points. That is a 62.8% advantage for the WX 5100.

Q: Does the Pro 450 win in any benchmark?

A: No. Across the three recorded head-to-head tests (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan), the Pro 450 wins zero tests. The WX 5100 wins all three.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The WX 5100 has 8 GB of GDDR5, while the Pro 450 has 2 GB of GDDR5. The WX 5100 also has a 256-bit memory bus compared to the Pro 450's 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The Pro 450 has an average benchmark score of 10,804 points, while the WX 5100 has an average of 8,863 points. The WX 5100's average is pulled down by its Passmark results, which are not available for the Pro 450 in the database.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 4.0 and are built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. However, they use different chips: the Pro 450 uses Baffin, and the WX 5100 uses Ellesmere.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers three Geekbench tests, and the WX 5100 dominates each one. The largest relative gap appears in OpenCL, where the WX 5100's 24,217 points beats the Pro 450's 9,002 points by 62.8%. This test tends to favor cards with more shading units and higher raw compute throughput, and the specification gap between the two cards explains the result.

Vulkan shows a 60.9% gap, with the WX 5100 scoring 26,909 points against 10,518 points for the Pro 450. Metal is the closest of the three, but still a decisive 55.5% win for the WX 5100: 29,003 versus 12,893.

The Pro 450's closest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (0.7% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (1.7% behind). Its average score of 10,804 places it just above the GeForce GTX 560 Ti, which scores 10,690. This shows the Pro 450 sits in a performance tier populated by older or lower-end GPUs.

The WX 5100's nearest rivals tell a different story. Its average score of 8,863 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (0.1% ahead) and the AMD Radeon 550X (0.6% behind). It also sits close to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (1.3% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (1.4% behind). The WX 5100's average is lower than the Pro 450's average despite winning every head-to-head test, which is a consequence of the additional Passmark results recorded for the WX 5100. Those Passmark scores are modest: the highest is 88 in DirectX 9, while DirectX 10, 11, and 12 scores range from 26 to 36.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially in almost every measurable specification. The Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The WX 5100 uses the Ellesmere chip with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical: 24.4 million per mm² for the Pro 450 versus 24.6 million per mm² for the WX 5100.

Shading units scale dramatically: 640 on the Pro 450 versus 1,792 on the WX 5100. Texture mapping units follow with 40 versus 112, and render output units with 16 versus 32. Pixel rate is 12.80 GPixel/s on the Pro 450 versus 34.75 GPixel/s on the WX 5100. Texture rate is 32.00 GTexel/s versus 121.6 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,024.0 GFLOPS versus 3.892 TFLOPS, a roughly 3.8 times advantage for the WX 5100. FP16 performance is identical to FP32 on both cards, at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory specifications diverge as well. The Pro 450 offers 2 GB GDDR5 at 5.1 Gbps effective with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The WX 5100 offers 8 GB GDDR5 at 5 Gbps effective with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The bus width doubles from 128-bit to 256-bit. Clock behavior differs too: the Pro 450 has no recorded base or boost clock, while the WX 5100 lists a 713 MHz base and 1086 MHz boost. Memory clock is similar: 1270 MHz on the Pro 450 versus 1250 MHz on the WX 5100.

Power and physical design differ. The Pro 450 is rated at 35 W and uses an MXM module, while the WX 5100 is rated at 75 W, is single-slot, and has no power connectors with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Pro 450 uses PCIe 3.0 x8 and its display outputs are portable-device dependent. The WX 5100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The WX 5100 measures 173 mm by 112 mm. The Pro 450 lists no dimensions.

Architecture Differences

Both cards belong to the GCN 4.0 architecture family and are fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. They share the same DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 API support. Neither card includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

The key architectural difference lies in the chip design. The Pro 450's Baffin die is a smaller, lower-power implementation with 3,000 million transistors and a 123 mm² die size. The WX 5100's Ellesmere die is nearly double that: 5,700 million transistors on 232 mm². The transistor density is essentially the same, which suggests the two chips use the same manufacturing process and design rules, but Ellesmere packs far more execution resources.

The WX 5100's additional 1,152 shading units, 72 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units translate directly into higher pixel fill, texture fill, and compute throughput. Its doubled memory bus width and quadrupled memory capacity also reduce bandwidth bottlenecks in large data sets. The Pro 450, with its 35 W TDP and MXM form factor, is clearly optimized for thermal and space constraints rather than peak throughput.

Generation labels differ as well: the Pro 450 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation, while the WX 5100 belongs to the Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) generation. The WX 5100 lists a predecessor (Radeon Pro GCN) and successor (Radeon Pro Vega), while the Pro 450 has neither in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the stronger card in every recorded benchmark. Users who need maximum Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan performance should choose the WX 5100 without hesitation. Its 8 GB memory capacity, 256-bit bus, and 3.892 TFLOPS of FP32 compute make it suitable for professional rendering, simulation, and compute workloads that would quickly exhaust the Pro 450's 2 GB frame buffer and 1,024.0 GFLOPS.

The AMD Radeon Pro 450 is the appropriate choice only for systems that require its 35 W power envelope and MXM module form factor. It has no benchmark wins, but its compact design and lower power consumption may fit portable workstation chassis where the WX 5100's 75 W single-slot card cannot be installed. Users should also note that the Pro 450's average benchmark score of 10,804 actually exceeds the WX 5100's 8,863, but that is due to the WX 5100's additional Passmark results, which are not available for the Pro 450. The three shared Geekbench tests all favor the WX 5100.

In terms of positioning, the Pro 450's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and GeForce MX350, while the WX 5100 sits near the Radeon R9 M265X and Radeon 550X. The WX 5100's launch MSRP was 499 USD, and it remains the recommended pick for any workload where performance matters more than physical size.