AMD Radeon Pro Duo vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo represent two very different approaches to professional graphics, separated by a generation of architecture and a significant gap in physical scale. The WX 7100 is a single-GPU, 14 nm Polaris part designed for efficiency, while the Pro Duo is a dual-GPU monster built on 28 nm GCN 3.0 silicon. Benchmark data shows a clear, if narrow, overall winner in compute workloads, but the story is more complex when examining the underlying specifications and the specific use cases each card was built to serve. The WX 7100 holds a 12% lead over the Pro Duo in the available OpenCL benchmark, yet the Pro Duo counters with nearly double the raw shading power on paper. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, architectural divergence, and practical implications for professional workflows.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it favors the Radeon Pro WX 7100 decisively. The WX 7100 scores 40148 points, while the Radeon Pro Duo manages 35860 points. This translates to a 12% advantage for the WX 7100, a notable margin given the Pro Duo’s much larger silicon footprint and higher thermal envelope. In the context of the nearest rivals, the WX 7100’s score places it within a tight cluster: it trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 by 0.8% (40377 points) and the AMD Radeon Pro 580 by 0.6% (40318 points), while leading the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile by 1.3% (39568 points) and the AMD Radeon Pro 575 by 1.3% (39555 points). This suggests the WX 7100 delivers compute performance that is highly competitive with much newer or more specialized hardware.

The Radeon Pro Duo’s OpenCL score of 35860 places it in a slightly lower percentile bracket, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 at 35520 points, which the Pro Duo beats by 1%. It also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (35435 points) by 1.2% but falls behind the NVIDIA T1000 (36289 points) by 1.2% and the AMD Radeon RX 5300M (36529 points) by 1.8%. The data indicates that despite having double the shading units and texture units, the Pro Duo cannot translate that theoretical advantage into a higher OpenCL score. The 12% delta in favor of the WX 7100 suggests that software optimization and architectural efficiency matter more than raw hardware counts in this particular benchmark.

The wins column confirms the outcome: the WX 7100 secures 1 win in the head-to-head comparison, while the Pro Duo records 0 wins. However, it is critical to note that this comparison is limited to a single OpenCL test. The Pro Duo’s architecture, with its dual-GPU configuration and massive memory bandwidth, may excel in workloads that scale linearly across multiple devices, a scenario not captured by this particular benchmark run. The WX 7100’s win is real and measurable, but it does not necessarily invalidate the Pro Duo’s purpose in multi-GPU rendering or simulation tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectural foundations. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 uses the Ellesmere chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This newer node allows for a transistor count of 5,700 million packed into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the Radeon Pro Duo uses the Capsaicin chip based on the older GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This results in a higher total transistor count of 8,900 million but spread across a much larger 596 mm² die, giving a lower density of 14.9 million per square millimeter. The generational leap to 14 nm is a primary driver of the WX 7100’s efficiency advantages.

The core configuration differences are stark. The Pro Duo features 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The WX 7100, by contrast, has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. In raw pixel throughput, the Pro Duo achieves 64.00 GPixel/s versus the WX 7100’s 39.78 GPixel/s. Texture fill rates similarly favor the Pro Duo at 256.0 GTexel/s versus 179.0 GTexel/s for the WX 7100. Floating-point performance follows the same pattern: the Pro Duo delivers 8.192 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, while the WX 7100 provides 5.728 TFLOPS in both. Yet, as the benchmark shows, these raw numbers do not translate to a win for the Pro Duo in the OpenCL test.

Memory subsystems also diverge significantly. The WX 7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro Duo uses 4 GB of HBM on a massive 4096-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s. The Pro Duo’s memory clock is listed at 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective), while the WX 7100 runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The higher bandwidth of the Pro Duo is offset by its smaller capacity, which could be a limiting factor in large dataset workloads. The API support is similar, with both supporting DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the WX 7100 supports Vulkan 1.3 while the Pro Duo is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has an average benchmark score of 40063, while the AMD Radeon Pro Duo has an average score of 35860. The WX 7100 also holds a higher percentile ranking at 82 versus 80 for the Pro Duo.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two cards?

A: The WX 7100 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro Duo features 4 GB of HBM memory on a 4096-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro Duo has higher bandwidth but half the capacity.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The WX 7100 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W PSU. The Pro Duo has a TDP of 350 W and requires three 8-pin connectors with a suggested 750 W PSU.

Q: Which card has a more recent architectural foundation?

A: The WX 7100 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process, while the Pro Duo uses GCN 3.0 on a 28 nm process. The WX 7100’s architecture is newer and more power-efficient per transistor.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for each card?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 7100 had a launch MSRP of 799 USD. The Radeon Pro Duo had a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD.

Q: In the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark, what is the exact performance gap?

A: The WX 7100 scored 40148 points compared to the Pro Duo’s 35860 points, resulting in a 12% advantage for the WX 7100.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights only the fields where the two cards differ:

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 | AMD Radeon Pro Duo |

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

| Chip | Ellesmere | Capsaicin |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 3.0 |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) | Radeon Pro GCN |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 8,900 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 596 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 14.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1188 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1243 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 144 | 256 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 39.78 GPixel/s | 64.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 179.0 GTexel/s | 256.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 / FP16 | 5.728 TFLOPS | 8.192 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 130 W | 350 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 3x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 750 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 241 mm (9.5 inches) length | 277 mm (10.9 inches) length |

| Release Date | 2016-11-09 | 2016-04-25 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro GCN | FirePro GCN |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Vega | Radeon Pro Polaris |

| Launch MSRP | 799 USD | 1,499 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is the clear winner in the measured OpenCL benchmark, and its advantages extend to practical workstation usability. Its single-slot design, 130 W TDP, and single 6-pin power connector make it far easier to integrate into dense multi-GPU systems or compact workstations. The 8 GB of GDDR5 memory provides more capacity for large models or textures, and the support for DisplayPort 1.4a allows for higher resolution and refresh rate outputs. For professionals running OpenCL-accelerated applications that do not scale perfectly across multiple GPUs, the WX 7100’s 12% performance lead over the Pro Duo in the head-to-head test makes it the more reliable choice. Its newer GCN 4.0 architecture also ensures better driver maturity for modern API features, including Vulkan 1.3 support.

The Radeon Pro Duo, despite losing the benchmark comparison, retains specific strengths that make it relevant for certain workloads. Its dual-GPU configuration, with 4096 shading units and 8.192 TFLOPS of compute power, is designed for applications that can explicitly use multiple devices. The 512.0 GB/s of HBM bandwidth is more than double that of the WX 7100, which is a decisive advantage for memory-bandwidth-bound tasks such as large matrix operations or high-resolution volumetric rendering. The Pro Duo also offers higher pixel and texture fill rates, which could benefit rasterization-heavy workloads that are not well-represented in the OpenCL compute test. However, the 350 W TDP and three 8-pin connectors demand a robust power supply and cooling solution, limiting its deployment to larger chassis.

In summary, the WX 7100 wins on efficiency, software compatibility, and the only available direct benchmark. The Pro Duo wins on raw hardware specifications, memory bandwidth, and theoretical compute throughput. For single-GPU OpenCL workflows, the WX 7100 is the superior choice. For multi-GPU scaling or bandwidth-intensive tasks where the Pro Duo’s dual dies can be fully utilized, it may still justify its higher power draw and cost. The benchmark data does not support the Pro Duo as a general-purpose winner, but it acknowledges its specialized capabilities.