AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 are two professional-grade GPUs built on the same Vega 10 chip, yet benchmark results show they are not interchangeable. The data indicates a clear split: the WX 9100 dominates in Metal and OpenCL workloads, while the Vega 56 takes a decisive lead in Vulkan. With an average benchmark score of 64,212 versus 63,693, the WX 9100 holds a slim 0.8% aggregate advantage, but the per-test deltas reveal that the choice between these two hinges entirely on the target application’s API.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 scores 66,004 against the WX 9100’s 54,711. That is a 17.1% advantage for the Vega 56, the largest margin in any test. This is not a marginal win; it is a substantial gap that flips the overall narrative. For any workload that leverages Vulkan, the data strongly favors the Vega 56, making it the superior choice for modern cross-platform graphics APIs that rely on this low-overhead interface.

In contrast, the WX 9100 posts decisive wins in the other two benchmarks. In Geekbench Metal, the WX 9100 scores 71,319 versus 63,145 for the Vega 56, a 12.9% lead. This is the WX 9100’s strongest showing, suggesting that Apple’s Metal API is particularly well-optimized for the higher-end configuration of the Vega 10 chip. The OpenCL result is closer but still favors the WX 9100: 66,605 versus 61,930, a 7.5% margin. Across the three tests, the WX 9100 wins two and the Vega 56 wins one, but the magnitude of the Vulkan loss for the WX 9100 is nearly equivalent to its Metal win, creating a nuanced overall picture.

Looking at the aggregate scores, the WX 9100 averages 64,212, which places it 0.8% ahead of the Vega 56’s 63,693. Both cards sit in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, meaning they are closely matched in the broader landscape. The nearest rivals for the WX 9100 include the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63,842 (0.6% behind) and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (0.6% behind). The Vega 56’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 7600M at 63,775 (0.1% ahead) and the RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (0.2% ahead). These tiny deltas underscore that both cards are essentially peer-tier in aggregate, but the API-specific swings are what truly differentiate them.

The Verdict

The data delivers a clear verdict: choose the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 if your primary workloads are Metal-based or rely on OpenCL, and choose the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 if Vulkan is your target API. For Metal users, the WX 9100’s 12.9% lead over the Vega 56 is substantial and directly translates to faster rendering, compute, and machine-learning tasks that run through Apple’s framework. OpenCL users also get a 7.5% edge with the WX 9100, making it the safer pick for legacy compute stacks that still depend on this open standard.

Conversely, the Vega 56 is the unequivocal winner for Vulkan, posting a 17.1% higher score than the WX 9100. This makes it the better choice for modern game engines, real-time ray tracing pipelines, and any software that has adopted Vulkan as its primary interface. The Vega 56 also offers a lower thermal profile at 210W versus 230W, and it does not require external power connectors, which could simplify integration in certain system builds. However, the WX 9100 counters with double the memory at 16GB versus 8GB, a higher boost clock of 1500 MHz versus 1250 MHz, and significantly more shading units at 4096 versus 3584.

In practical terms, the WX 9100 is the heavier compute workhorse, while the Vega 56 is the API-specialist that wins where it matters most for Vulkan. The verdict is not about which card is “better” overall—it is about matching the hardware to the software stack. If the data shows a 17.1% Vulkan deficit for the WX 9100, ignoring that would be a mistake for any Vulkan-centric deployment.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same Vega 10 chip using GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. They share identical transistor counts of 12,500 million and the same die size of 495 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The fundamental architecture is thus identical, but the implementation differs in several key ways.

The WX 9100 is configured with 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations pipelines. The Vega 56 scales down to 3584 shading units and 224 texture mapping units, while retaining the same 64 ROPs. This means the WX 9100 has 14.3% more shading units and the same number of ROPs, which explains its higher pixel rate of 96.00 GPixel/s versus 80.00 GPixel/s, and its higher texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s versus 280.0 GTexel/s.

The memory architecture is a major divergence point. The WX 9100 carries 16GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 56 has 8GB of HBM2 on the same 2048-bit bus, but its bandwidth drops to 402.4 GB/s. Both use the same bus width, so the bandwidth difference comes from the memory clock: the WX 9100 runs at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective) versus 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) for the Vega 56. This 20% bandwidth advantage for the WX 9100 is critical for memory-bound compute tasks.

The feature set is identical in terms of API support: both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Neither has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, so the architectural focus remains on traditional rasterization and compute throughput. The power envelope differs, with the WX 9100 rated at 230W and the Vega 56 at 210W, but the Vega 56 is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, whereas the WX 9100 is a dual-slot card requiring a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every specification that matters for raw performance. The WX 9100 has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 1500 MHz, while the Vega 56 operates at 1138 MHz base and 1250 MHz boost. This 250 MHz boost gap is substantial, contributing to the WX 9100’s higher FP32 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS versus 8.960 TFLOPS. The FP16 numbers follow the same pattern: 24.58 TFLOPS for the WX 9100 versus 17.92 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Memory capacity is doubled on the WX 9100: 16GB versus 8GB. Bandwidth is 483.8 GB/s versus 402.4 GB/s. The shading unit count is 4096 versus 3584, and the TMU count is 256 versus 224. The pixel rate is 96.00 GPixel/s versus 80.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 384.0 GTexel/s versus 280.0 GTexel/s. The WX 9100 also has a higher TDP of 230W versus 210W, and it is a dual-slot card with a 267 mm length, while the Vega 56 has no listed dimensions.

The display outputs differ: the WX 9100 offers 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Vega 56 has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The WX 9100 has a launch MSRP of 1,599 USD; the Vega 56 has no launch MSRP listed. The WX 9100 was released on July 9, 2017, while the Vega 56 followed on August 13, 2017. The WX 9100 has a predecessor (Radeon Pro GCN) and a successor (Radeon Pro Vega), while the Vega 56 has neither listed. Both are end-of-life products.

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, which is 0.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56’s 63,693.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 scores 66,004 versus 54,711 for the WX 9100, a 17.1% advantage for the Vega 56.

Q: Does the WX 9100 have more memory?

A: Yes, the WX 9100 has 16GB of HBM2 memory, while the Vega 56 has 8GB of HBM2 memory. Both use a 2048-bit bus, but the WX 9100’s bandwidth is 483.8 GB/s versus 402.4 GB/s for the Vega 56.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The WX 9100 has a boost clock of 1500 MHz, which is 250 MHz higher than the Vega 56’s 1250 MHz boost clock.

Q: Are both cards based on the same chip?

A: Yes, both are based on the Vega 10 chip using GCN 5.0 architecture, with identical transistor counts of 12,500 million and the same 495 mm² die size.

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The WX 9100 wins in OpenCL, scoring 66,605 versus 61,930 for the Vega 56, a 7.5% lead.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is the clear winner in Metal and OpenCL workloads. Its 12.9% Metal lead and 7.5% OpenCL lead make it the superior choice for macOS-centric environments, where Metal is the primary graphics and compute API. The WX 9100 also wins on raw compute specifications: it has 4096 shading units versus 3584, a 1500 MHz boost clock versus 1250 MHz, and 16GB of HBM2 versus 8GB. These advantages translate to higher FP32 throughput (12.29 TFLOPS versus 8.960 TFLOPS) and higher memory bandwidth (483.8 GB/s versus 402.4 GB/s), making it the better card for large dataset processing, rendering farms, and any task that can utilize its 2:1 FP16 ratio for machine learning inference.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 wins decisively in Vulkan, with a 17.1% performance advantage. This makes it the go-to choice for Vulkan-based game development, real-time simulation, and cross-platform compute that has adopted Vulkan as the standard. The Vega 56 also has a lower TDP of 210W versus 230W, and it requires no external power connectors, which could be an advantage in power-constrained or compact systems. Despite having fewer shading units and less memory, the Vega 56’s Vulkan score of 66,004 is the highest single-test result between the two, indicating that its architecture, when properly utilized through Vulkan, can outperform the WX 9100’s higher raw specs. For users whose software stack is Vulkan-only, the Vega 56 is the data-backed choice, and the 17.1% delta is too large to ignore.