AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 are both end-of-life graphics cards, but they represent vastly different eras and market segments. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, with the older NVIDIA card taking the win, yet the AMD card offers a modern feature set and significantly lower power demands. This analysis breaks down the numbers to determine which card suits specific workloads.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 is the faster card in raw compute, winning the only head-to-head test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 560 scores 9058, which is 5.8% higher than the Radeon Pro WX 2100’s 8536. The GTX 560 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 9058 compared to the WX 2100’s 9653? No, that is incorrect; the WX 2100's average is 9653, which is higher. The GTX 560’s average is 9058, placing it in the 45th percentile, while the WX 2100 sits in the 46th percentile.

For the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100, the case rests on efficiency and modern features. Its 35 W TDP is a fraction of the GTX 560’s 150 W, and it requires no power connectors and a 200 W suggested PSU versus the GTX 560’s 2x 6-pin connectors and 450 W suggested PSU. It also supports Vulkan 1.3, while the GTX 560 has no Vulkan support listed. If you need a low-profile, single-slot card for a professional workstation with modern API support, the WX 2100 is the logical choice.

For the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560, the verdict is for legacy performance. It has higher raw OpenCL compute and a wider 256-bit memory bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. However, its dual-slot design, higher power draw, and lack of modern API support make it a poor fit for contemporary systems. The data suggests it is only preferable if you require maximum compute performance in a legacy system where power and space are not concerns.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is substantial. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 is built on GCN 4.0 architecture using a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, packing 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with 1,950 million transistors spread across a much larger 332 mm² die, yielding a density of just 5.9M per mm².

The WX 2100 features 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 560 has fewer shading units at 336, but more TMUs (56) and double the ROPs (32). Memory configurations differ significantly: the WX 2100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus (48.00 GB/s bandwidth), while the GTX 560 has 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus (128.0 GB/s bandwidth). Clock speeds also differ, with the WX 2100 running at a 925 MHz base and 1219 MHz boost, while the GTX 560’s core clock is not listed in the data.

The process node difference drives the power gap: the WX 2100 is rated at 35 W TDP, while the GTX 560 is rated at 150 W. The WX 2100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the GTX 560 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support. The WX 2100 also uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the GTX 560 uses the older PCIe 2.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There is only one direct benchmark comparison available: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are close but decisive. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 scores 9058, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 scores 8536. This gives the GTX 560 a 5.8% advantage, marking its only win in the head-to-head data.

This single result paints a clear picture of raw compute performance. The GTX 560’s victory is likely attributed to its much higher memory bandwidth (128.0 GB/s vs 48.00 GB/s) and wider memory bus (256-bit vs 64-bit), which are critical for memory-intensive OpenCL workloads. Despite having fewer shading units (336 vs 512), the GTX 560’s advantage in texture rate (45.36 GTexel/s vs 39.01 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (11.34 GPixel/s vs 19.50 GPixel/s) shows a different balance of capabilities; the AMD card leads in pixel rate, while the NVIDIA card leads in texture rate.

However, the Radeon Pro WX 2100 does have a higher average benchmark score across all its tests. Its average is 9653, which includes a Geekbench Vulkan score of 10770 that the GTX 560 cannot match due to lack of Vulkan support. The GTX 560’s average is 9058, based solely on its OpenCL result. This suggests that while the GTX 560 wins the legacy OpenCL test, the WX 2100 is more competitive in modern API workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher raw OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 scores 9058 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 5.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100’s 8536.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the WX 2100 supports Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 has no Vulkan support listed in its specifications.

Q: Which card has a lower power consumption?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 has a 35 W TDP, which is significantly lower than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560’s 150 W TDP.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 has a memory bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 has 48.00 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 has an average benchmark score of 9653, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 has an average of 9058.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 has a transistor density of 21.4M per mm², while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 has 5.9M per mm².

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 wins on efficiency and modernity. Its 35 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it ideal for compact, low-power workstations. The single-slot design and 168 mm length (6.6 inches) allow for installation in space-constrained chassis. The WX 2100 also wins on modern API support, offering Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), which are essential for current software. Its 2 GB of memory is double the GTX 560’s 1 GB, and its display outputs (1x DisplayPort 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a) are far more modern than the GTX 560’s 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The WX 2100 also has a higher pixel rate (19.50 GPixel/s vs 11.34 GPixel/s) and a better average benchmark score (9653 vs 9058).

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 wins on legacy compute performance. Its victory in the Geekbench OpenCL test (9058 vs 8536) is the single most important factor. It also has superior memory bandwidth (128.0 GB/s vs 48.00 GB/s) and a wider memory bus (256-bit vs 64-bit), which benefits memory-heavy tasks. The GTX 560 has a higher texture rate (45.36 GTexel/s vs 39.01 GTexel/s) and double the ROPs (32 vs 16). It also has a higher FP32 compute rating (1,088.6 GFLOPS vs 1,248.3 GFLOPS? No, the WX 2100 is higher). The data shows the WX 2100 has higher FP32 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS. The GTX 560 wins here only in the OpenCL benchmark and memory-related metrics.

For specific use cases: If the workload is legacy OpenCL compute and requires maximum memory bandwidth, the GTX 560 is the pick. If the workload is modern, API-agnostic, or power-sensitive, the WX 2100 is the clear winner. The WX 2100 also wins on pixel fill rate, which is relevant for 2D or light 3D professional rendering. The GTX 560’s lack of Vulkan support is a disqualifying factor for any modern game or application that relies on it. The WX 2100’s 2 GB frame buffer also makes it more viable for larger textures, while the GTX 560’s 1 GB is a hard limit.