AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 are both professional-grade GPUs built on the same Vega 10 silicon, yet they target very different market segments. The WX 9100 is a dual-slot workstation card with a 230 W TDP, while the Vega 48 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) designed for portable devices. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner, but the Vulkan results reveal a notable upset. Across three Geekbench tests, the WX 9100 wins two, with an average benchmark score of 64,212 compared to the Vega 48's 60,140. This places the WX 9100 in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, one point ahead of the Vega 48's 88th percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 66,605 against the Vega 48's 53,757. This represents a 23.9% performance advantage, the largest delta between the two cards in any test. The WX 9100's superior shading unit count (4096 vs 3072) and higher memory bandwidth (483.8 GB/s vs 402.4 GB/s) likely contribute to this substantial lead in compute-heavy workloads.

In the Geekbench Metal test, the WX 9100 again takes the win, scoring 71,319 compared to the Vega 48's 69,010. The 3.3% margin here is much narrower than the OpenCL gap, suggesting that Metal performance is more balanced between the two architectures. Still, the WX 9100 maintains its position as the faster card in Apple's graphics API.

The surprise comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 wins with a score of 57,653 against the WX 9100's 54,711. The 5.1% margin in favor of the Vega 48 is significant, given that the WX 9100 dominates in the other two benchmarks. This result indicates that the Vega 48's lower clock speeds and reduced core count do not hinder its Vulkan performance, possibly due to driver optimizations or architectural efficiencies in that specific API.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the WX 9100's average score of 64,212 places it just 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842) and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830). It also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693) by 0.8%. The Vega 48, meanwhile, sits 0.3% behind the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60,326) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60,347), but leads the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,657) by 2.5% and the NVIDIA P102-100 (58,528) by 2.8%.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is the clear choice for compute-intensive applications that leverage OpenCL. Its 23.9% advantage in that benchmark over the Vega 48 is decisive, and its 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the Vega 48's 7.373 TFLOPS. The WX 9100 also offers double the memory capacity (16 GB vs 8 GB), which is critical for large datasets in scientific computing, machine learning, or complex 3D rendering. For professionals working in environments that rely on Metal, the WX 9100's 3.3% lead, while modest, still makes it the safer bet.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, despite its lower overall scores, claims a meaningful victory in Vulkan. With a 5.1% edge over the WX 9100 in that specific API, it is better suited for Vulkan-based applications, such as certain game engines or cross-platform compute frameworks. Its integrated nature and lack of power connectors make it ideal for portable devices, where the WX 9100's 230 W TDP and dual-slot design would be impractical. The Vega 48's 88th percentile ranking still places it among the top GPUs globally, so it is by no means a weak performer.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the WX 9100 wins decisively. For those constrained by form factor or specifically targeting Vulkan workloads, the Vega 48 holds distinct advantages. The data shows that the WX 9100 is the better all-around performer, but the Vega 48 is not without its niche strengths.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. They share identical transistor counts of 12,500 million and die sizes of 495 mm², resulting in the same transistor density of 25.3M per mm². This means the fundamental silicon is the same; the differences lie in how each card is configured and deployed.

The WX 9100 has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). In contrast, the Vega 48 is configured with 3072 shading units and 192 TMUs, while maintaining the same 64 ROPs. This reduction in shading units and TMUs directly impacts the WX 9100's higher pixel rate of 96.00 GPixel/s versus the Vega 48's 76.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The WX 9100 features 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 483.8 GB/s bandwidth at a memory clock of 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective). The Vega 48 has 8 GB of HBM2 on the same 2048-bit bus, but with a lower memory clock of 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective), yielding 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. This 81.4 GB/s difference in bandwidth is substantial for memory-bound workloads.

Clock speeds are another divergence. The WX 9100 has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 1500 MHz, while the Vega 48 does not list base or boost clocks in the data. The WX 9100's higher clocks contribute to its FP32 performance of 12.29 TFLOPS, compared to the Vega 48's 7.373 TFLOPS. FP16 performance follows the same 2:1 ratio, with the WX 9100 achieving 24.58 TFLOPS and the Vega 48 reaching 14.75 TFLOPS.

Form factor is a major architectural difference in deployment. The WX 9100 is a dual-slot card with a 267 mm (10.5 inches) length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) height, requiring a 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. The Vega 48 is an IGP with no dimensions listed, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, indicating it is soldered onto a motherboard. Both cards use a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface and support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 has an average benchmark score of 64,212, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 60,140. The WX 9100 also holds a higher percentile ranking at 89 versus the Vega 48's 88.

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

A: The WX 9100 scores 71,319 in Geekbench Metal, which is 3.3% higher than the Vega 48's 69,010. This makes the WX 9100 the winner in that test.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Vega 48 beats the WX 9100?

A: Yes, in the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Vega 48 scores 57,653 compared to the WX 9100's 54,711, giving the Vega 48 a 5.1% advantage. This is the only benchmark where the Vega 48 wins.

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

A: The WX 9100 comes with 16 GB of HBM2 memory, while the Vega 48 has 8 GB of HBM2. Both use a 2048-bit memory bus, but the WX 9100 offers higher bandwidth at 483.8 GB/s versus 402.4 GB/s.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same chip?

A: Yes, both the WX 9100 and the Vega 48 use the Vega 10 chip with the GCN 5.0 architecture. They share identical transistor counts (12,500 million), die size (495 mm²), and process node (14 nm).

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The WX 9100 has a TDP of 230 W, requires a 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The Vega 48 has no listed TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU, as it is an integrated processor.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 |

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

| Generation | Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) | Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) |

| Base Clock | 1200 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1500 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective) | 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 483.8 GB/s | 402.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 256 | 192 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 96.00 GPixel/s | 76.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 384.0 GTexel/s | 230.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 12.29 TFLOPS | 7.373 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 230 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | Not listed |

| Display Outputs | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 267 mm (10.5 in) length, 111 mm (4.4 in) height | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2017-07-09 | 2019-03-18 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,599 USD | Not listed |

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is the superior performer in most measurable ways. It wins two of three head-to-head benchmarks, including a commanding 23.9% lead in OpenCL and a 3.3% edge in Metal. Its higher shading unit count (4096 vs 3072), faster clocks (1500 MHz boost vs not listed), and larger memory pool (16 GB vs 8 GB) make it the obvious pick for compute-heavy professional workloads. The WX 9100's 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 performance is nearly double the Vega 48's 7.373 TFLOPS, and its 483.8 GB/s bandwidth outpaces the Vega 48's 402.4 GB/s. For users who need maximum raw performance in a workstation, the data unequivocally favors the WX 9100.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, however, has its place. Its 5.1% victory in Vulkan shows that it can outperform the WX 9100 in specific API environments. As an IGP with no power connectors, it is designed for portable devices where the WX 9100's dual-slot 230 W design is infeasible. The Vega 48's 88th percentile ranking still makes it a capable GPU, and its lower core count and memory bandwidth do not prevent it from winning in Vulkan. For mobile professionals or those working primarily with Vulkan-based applications, the Vega 48 is a valid choice.

Ultimately, the decision comes down to use case. The WX 9100 is the data-driven winner for general compute, offering higher scores across most benchmarks and double the memory. The Vega 48 is a specialized component that sacrifices raw performance for integration, yet still demonstrates competitive strength in Vulkan. Buyers should weigh the WX 9100's benchmark dominance against the Vega 48's form factor advantages and Vulkan performance. Both cards are end-of-life products, but the WX 9100's broader capabilities make it the more versatile option.