AMD Radeon Pro 5300 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 are both end-of-life professional workstation GPUs, yet they represent two distinct design philosophies from AMD. The data shows a clear split: the newer 5300, based on the 7nm RDNA 1.0 architecture, dominates in one specific API workload, while the older WX 7100, built on 14nm GCN 4.0, holds its ground in two others. With an average benchmark score of 40870, the 5300 sits just 2% ahead of the WX 7100’s 40063, placing both at the 82nd percentile among all GPUs. This close overall margin, however, masks significant architectural and performance divergences that matter depending on the application.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the Geekbench Metal test, where the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 decisively outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100. The 5300 scores 48070, a full 19.1% higher than the WX 7100’s 40357. This is a substantial lead, indicating that in Metal-accelerated workloads—common in macOS creative applications—the 5300 offers a significant performance advantage. This single win accounts for the 5300’s higher average score, and it aligns with the 5300’s newer architecture and higher boost clock of 1650 MHz compared to the WX 7100’s 1243 MHz.

The tables turn in the OpenCL benchmark, where the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 takes a narrow victory. The WX 7100 scores 40148, edging out the 5300’s 38747 by 3.5%. While this is a win for the WX 7100, the margin is modest, suggesting that in cross-platform compute tasks, the two cards are more evenly matched. The WX 7100’s higher raw FP32 throughput of 5.728 TFLOPS, compared to the 5300’s 4.224 TFLOPS, likely underpins this result, as OpenCL often scales with raw shader compute.

The Vulkan benchmark shows a more pronounced advantage for the older card. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 scores 39683, beating the 5300’s 35793 by a considerable 9.8%. This is the largest delta of the three tests in favor of the WX 7100. Interestingly, the WX 7100 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the 5300 supports Vulkan 1.4, yet the older card still wins. This suggests that factors beyond API version support, such as driver maturity for the GCN architecture or memory subsystem design, play a crucial role in Vulkan performance.

Overall, the head-to-head record stands at 1 win for the 5300 and 2 wins for the WX 7100. However, the magnitude of the 5300’s Metal victory (19.1%) is far larger than the combined margins of the WX 7100’s victories (3.5% and 9.8%). This means that in applications specifically optimized for Metal, the 5300 is the clear performance leader, while the WX 7100 offers more balanced performance across OpenCL and Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 is built on TSMC’s 7 nm process node, packing 6,400 million transistors into a die size of 158 mm². This yields a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 uses GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm node, with 5,700 million transistors spread across a larger 232 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 24.6M per mm². This process advantage gives the 5300 a significant efficiency edge, reflected in its 85 W TDP versus the WX 7100’s 130 W.

The compute configurations differ markedly. The 5300 features 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 render output units (ROPs). The WX 7100, by contrast, has a much higher count of 2304 shading units and 144 TMUs, but retains the same 32 ROPs. This explains the raw throughput differences: the WX 7100 achieves 5.728 TFLOPS FP32 and 179.0 GTexel/s texture rate, while the 5300 delivers 4.224 TFLOPS FP32 and 132.0 GTexel/s. The 5300 does lead in pixel rate at 52.80 GPixel/s versus 39.78 GPixel/s, a result of its higher boost clock.

Memory is another point of divergence. The 5300 comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 7100 offers double the capacity at 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yet the bandwidth is identical at 224.0 GB/s. The 5300’s memory runs at 14 Gbps effective, while the WX 7100’s runs at 7 Gbps effective; the WX 7100 compensates with a wider bus. For large datasets, the WX 7100’s 8 GB capacity is a clear advantage, while the 5300’s GDDR6 may offer lower latency per byte.

The feature sets also reflect their eras. The 5300 supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the WX 7100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The 5300 has no display outputs, making it an integrated GPU (IGP) solution, whereas the WX 7100 is a single-slot card with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and a 6-pin power connector. In terms of API support, the 5300 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores, making them purely rasterization and compute focused.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice between these two GPUs hinges entirely on the target workload. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 is the superior choice for Metal-based applications, where its 19.1% lead is decisive. Its higher pixel rate and newer GDDR6 memory also make it attractive for tasks that are fill-rate bound or memory latency sensitive. The 5300’s lower TDP of 85 W also makes it far easier to integrate into power-constrained systems, especially given its IGP form factor and lack of external power connectors.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100, conversely, is the better pick for OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. Its wins of 3.5% and 9.8% respectively, combined with double the memory capacity (8 GB vs 4 GB), make it more versatile for compute-heavy tasks that require larger working sets. The WX 7100’s higher FP32 throughput of 5.728 TFLOPS is also a boon for scientific computing and rendering that leverages raw shader power. Its single-slot design and 4x DisplayPort outputs make it a practical choice for multi-display setups.

For users locked into the Metal ecosystem, the 5300 is the unambiguous winner. For those using cross-platform APIs or needing more VRAM, the WX 7100 offers better balance. The 82nd percentile ranking for both cards indicates they are in the same performance tier overall, but the distribution of scores tells a different story. The 5300’s average score of 40870 is just 2% higher than the WX 7100’s 40063, a margin that could be considered negligible in mixed workloads. Ultimately, the verdict is workload-dependent: Metal users should pick the 5300, while OpenCL/Vulkan users should pick the WX 7100.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 has an average benchmark score of 40870, which is 2% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100’s 40063.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench Metal test?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 scores 48070, which is 19.1% higher than the WX 7100’s 40357, making it the clear winner in Metal workloads.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory. Both offer the same 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has a higher FP32 throughput of 5.728 TFLOPS, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 5300’s 4.224 TFLOPS.

Q: Do either of these GPUs support ray tracing?

A: No, neither the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 nor the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 is built on a 7 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 is built on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 wins in scenarios that favor its newer architecture and higher clocks. Its 19.1% lead in Metal is the single largest performance differential, making it the go-to choice for macOS-based creative work, video editing, and graphics rendering that leverages Apple’s Metal API. The 5300 also wins in pixel fill rate, delivering 52.80 GPixel/s versus 39.78 GPixel/s, which benefits high-resolution rasterization. Its lower TDP of 85 W and IGP form factor make it ideal for compact, power-efficient systems where a discrete card is not feasible. The 5300’s support for PCIe 4.0 x8 also provides faster data transfer to the host system, assuming the motherboard supports it.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 wins in compute-heavy and multi-display environments. Its 3.5% OpenCL and 9.8% Vulkan victories indicate superior performance in cross-platform compute and gaming/rendering APIs. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is double that of the 5300, allowing it to handle larger textures, models, and datasets without swapping. The WX 7100 also wins in raw shader throughput, with 2304 shading units and 144 TMUs producing 5.728 TFLOPS and 179.0 GTexel/s, respectively. Its single-slot design and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it a practical solution for multi-monitor professional setups. The launch MSRP of 799 USD for the WX 7100 is notable, though no pricing data exists for the 5300.

In terms of API support, the 5300 edges ahead with Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the WX 7100 supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0). This gives the 5300 a theoretical edge in future-proofing for newer API features, even though the WX 7100 currently wins in Vulkan benchmarks. For users needing display outputs, the WX 7100 is the only option, as the 5300 has none. The WX 7100 also requires a 300 W suggested PSU and a 6-pin connector, while the 5300 needs a 250 W PSU and no connector, making the 5300 easier to install in legacy systems.