AMD Radeon Pro VII vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data from the database shows a decisive performance advantage for the AMD Radeon Pro VII across all three recorded tests. In the Geekbench Metal test, the Pro VII scores 108,383 compared to the Pro WX 9100's 71,319, a delta of 52%. This is the closest margin between the two cards, but it still represents a substantial lead for the newer part.

The Geekbench OpenCL test narrows the gap somewhat, with the Pro VII scoring 90,148 against 66,605 for the Pro WX 9100. That translates to a 35.3% advantage, the smallest relative win of the three tests. Even so, the data indicates that the Pro VII maintains a clear edge in compute workloads that rely on OpenCL.

The largest discrepancy appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the Pro VII scores 92,862 while the Pro WX 9100 manages only 54,711, producing a 69.7% delta. This suggests that the architectural improvements in the Pro VII yield outsized benefits in Vulkan-based applications, possibly due to better driver optimization or hardware scheduling.

Looking at the broader database context, the Pro VII's average benchmark score is 97,131, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 7900M at 97,487 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 at 101,872 (4.7% higher), the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 at 92,466 (5% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 at 91,671 (6% lower). The Pro VII sits comfortably among these professional and high-end workstation cards.

For the Pro WX 9100, the average benchmark score is 64,212, which lands it in the 89th percentile. Its nearest rivals are notably weaker: the NVIDIA CMP 30HX scores 63,842 (0.6% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP scores 63,830 (0.6% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 7600M scores 63,775 (0.7% lower), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 scores 63,693 (0.8% lower). The Pro WX 9100 is effectively clustered with these mid-range parts, sitting only marginally above them in aggregate performance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent distinct generations of AMD's professional GPU lineup. The Radeon Pro VII is built on the Vega 20 chip using the GCN 5.1 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses the Vega 10 chip with the GCN 5.0 architecture, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process node difference is significant: the Pro VII packs 13,230 million transistors into a 331 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.0 million per mm². The Pro WX 9100 contains 12,500 million transistors across a much larger 495 mm² die, resulting in a density of only 25.3 million per mm².

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The Pro VII has a base clock of 1400 MHz and a boost clock of 1700 MHz, while the Pro WX 9100 operates at 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The memory clocks follow a similar pattern: the Pro VII runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), whereas the Pro WX 9100 runs at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective).

Memory configuration is another major divergence. Both cards have 16 GB of HBM2 memory, but the Pro VII uses a 4096-bit bus width, delivering a bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s. The Pro WX 9100 uses a 2048-bit bus, providing 483.8 GB/s. This means the Pro VII has over twice the memory bandwidth, which directly impacts throughput in memory-intensive workloads.

The compute unit layouts also differ. The Pro VII has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The Pro WX 9100 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the Pro VII achieves higher throughput due to its superior clocks and memory subsystem. Pixel rate for the Pro VII is 108.8 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s for the Pro WX 9100. Texture rate is 408.0 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s.

In terms of raw compute, the Pro VII delivers 13.06 TFLOPS FP32 and 26.11 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the Pro WX 9100 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Pro VII holds a modest edge in both precision formats.

The bus interface also differs: the Pro VII uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Pro WX 9100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Power consumption is rated at 250 W for the Pro VII versus 230 W for the Pro WX 9100, with both requiring a 600 W and 550 W suggested PSU respectively. Both cards are dual-slot designs with identical 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, but the Pro VII is longer at 305 mm (12 inches) versus 267 mm (10.5 inches) for the Pro WX 9100. Both have the same 111 mm (4.4 inches) height.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear winner for most professional workloads. The AMD Radeon Pro VII outperforms the Pro WX 9100 in every benchmark test recorded, with deltas ranging from 35.3% to 69.7%. The average benchmark score of 97,131 for the Pro VII versus 64,212 for the Pro WX 9100 represents a 51.3% overall advantage.

The Pro VII also sits in a higher performance tier within the database, at the 93rd percentile versus 89th for the Pro WX 9100. Its nearest rivals include substantially more capable cards like the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 and AMD Radeon RX 7900M, while the Pro WX 9100 is clustered with much lower-performing parts.

The Pro VII is the appropriate choice for users who prioritize compute performance, particularly in Vulkan-heavy applications where its 69.7% lead is most pronounced. It also offers superior memory bandwidth, which matters for large datasets and high-resolution workloads. The newer 7 nm process and PCIe 4.0 interface provide additional headroom for future platforms.

The Pro WX 9100 remains relevant for scenarios where its lower power draw (230 W versus 250 W) and shorter physical length (267 mm versus 305 mm) are important constraints. It also has more shading units (4096 versus 3840), though this does not translate into a performance win in any recorded test. For users with existing PCIe 3.0 systems or limited chassis space, the Pro WX 9100 still offers capable performance, but the data shows it trails the Pro VII consistently.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several specification fields. The process node is 7 nm for the Pro VII and 14 nm for the Pro WX 9100, with different foundries (TSMC versus GlobalFoundries). Transistor count is 13,230 million versus 12,500 million, and die size is 331 mm² versus 495 mm². Transistor density is 40.0M per mm² versus 25.3M per mm².

Base clock is 1400 MHz versus 1200 MHz, boost clock is 1700 MHz versus 1500 MHz, and memory clock is 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) versus 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective). Memory bus width is 4096 bit versus 2048 bit, and bandwidth is 1.02 TB/s versus 483.8 GB/s.

Shading units are 3840 versus 4096, TMUs are 240 versus 256, and ROPs are 64 for both. Pixel rate is 108.8 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 408.0 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 13.06 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 26.11 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS.

TDP is 250 W versus 230 W, suggested PSU is 600 W versus 550 W, and bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Length is 305 mm versus 267 mm, while height is 111 mm for both. Release dates are 2020-05-12 for the Pro VII and 2017-07-09 for the Pro WX 9100. The launch MSRP for the Pro VII is 1,899 USD, and for the Pro WX 9100 it is 1,599 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro VII scores 108,383 versus 71,319 for the Pro WX 9100, a 52% advantage.

Q: How large is the gap in OpenCL performance?

A: The Pro VII scores 90,148 while the Pro WX 9100 scores 66,605, giving the Pro VII a 35.3% lead.

Q: Which card performs better in Vulkan workloads?

A: The Pro VII scores 92,862 versus 54,711 for the Pro WX 9100, a 69.7% delta. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both have 16 GB of HBM2 memory. However, the Pro VII uses a 4096-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, while the Pro WX 9100 uses a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s.

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

A: The Pro VII has an average benchmark score of 97,131, placing it in the 93rd percentile. The Pro WX 9100 has an average score of 64,212, in the 89th percentile.

Q: How does the Pro VII compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Pro VII is 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 7900M, 4.7% below the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000, 5% above the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60, and 6% above the NVIDIA RTX A4500.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro VII wins every recorded benchmark category. Its largest margin is in Vulkan, where it leads by 69.7%. This indicates the Pro VII is particularly well-suited for applications that leverage the Vulkan API, such as modern game engines and cross-platform compute frameworks. Its 52% Metal lead suggests strong performance in Apple-centric workflows, despite the card being designed for Windows workstations. The 35.3% OpenCL advantage shows consistent compute capability across heterogeneous platforms.

The Pro WX 9100 does not win any benchmark category. However, it has specific physical and power characteristics that may make it preferable in certain deployments. Its 230 W TDP is lower than the Pro VII's 250 W, and its 267 mm length is significantly shorter than the 305 mm Pro VII. For compact workstation chassis or systems with limited power delivery, the Pro WX 9100 fits more easily. Its 550 W suggested PSU requirement is also more modest.

The Pro WX 9100's higher shading unit count (4096 versus 3840) does not yield a performance advantage in any recorded test, but the architecture difference may be relevant for software that is specifically tuned for GCN 5.0 rather than GCN 5.1. The older card also uses PCIe 3.0, which is fully compatible with older platforms without any performance penalty in the recorded benchmarks.

For users who need maximum compute throughput, the Pro VII is the clear choice based on the data. For users who prioritize physical compatibility, lower power consumption, or are working within a PCIe 3.0 platform, the Pro WX 9100 remains a functional option, though it will deliver consistently lower benchmark scores. The database also shows the Pro VII is positioned among much stronger rivals, indicating it belongs in a higher performance class altogether.