AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 vs NVIDIA GRID K2 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 records an average benchmark score of 9653, while the NVIDIA GRID K2 records 8080. The AMD part sits at the 46th percentile of all GPUs, whereas the NVIDIA part sits at the 42nd percentile.

Q: How does the GRID K2 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The GRID K2’s average score of 8080 is 0.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost (8067), 0.2% below the NVIDIA GeForce 945M (8099), and 0.3% above the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8053). Its largest delta is 0.5% ahead of the GeForce GTX 880M (8040).

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

A: The Radeon Pro WX 2100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 48.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GRID K2 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, over three times the bandwidth of the AMD card.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA GRID K2 leads with 23.84 GPixel/s, compared to 19.50 GPixel/s for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100. The texture rate also favors NVIDIA, 95.36 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the AMD card wins?

A: In the recorded head-to-head data, the only shared test is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA GRID K2 wins with a score of 10602 against the AMD’s 8536, a delta of -19.5% for AMD. The database records zero wins for the AMD card and one win for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 2100 has a TDP of 35 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. The GRID K2 has a TDP of 225 W, requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector, and needs a 550 W PSU.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 is built on GCN 4.0, using the Lexa chip, and fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA GRID K2 uses the Kepler architecture, based on the GK104 chip, and is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 14 nm versus 28 nm, which directly impacts transistor density. AMD packs 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, yielding a density of 21.4M transistors per mm². NVIDIA integrates 3,540 million transistors into a much larger 294 mm² die, giving a density of 12.0M per mm². The AMD chip is denser by a wide margin, but the NVIDIA chip has more total transistors.

The compute resources differ sharply. The Radeon Pro WX 2100 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The GRID K2 has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That is three times the shading units, four times the TMUs, and double the ROPs for the NVIDIA card. Consequently, the theoretical peak throughputs diverge: the AMD card reaches 1,248.3 GFLOPS FP32, while the GRID K2 reaches 2.289 TFLOPS FP32. The AMD card also lists FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the NVIDIA card lists no FP16 capability.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The AMD card uses a 64-bit memory bus, while the GRID K2 uses a 256-bit bus. Combined with different memory clocks (1500 MHz / 6 Gbps effective for AMD, 1250 MHz / 5 Gbps effective for NVIDIA), the bandwidth gap is large: 48.00 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s. The capacities are 2 GB and 4 GB, respectively.

Interface and output differences are notable. The Radeon Pro WX 2100 uses PCIe 3.0 x8 and provides one DisplayPort 1.4a plus two mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The GRID K2 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 but has no display outputs at all, reflecting its server/visualization purpose. API support differs slightly: both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.3, while the NVIDIA card supports Vulkan 1.2.175. The Radeon card supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GRID K2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), indicating a lower feature level.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to distinct use cases. The NVIDIA GRID K2 is the clear winner in raw compute throughput. Its OpenCL score of 10602 beats the AMD card’s 8536 by 19.5%. In the shared benchmark, the GRID K2 also holds advantages in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity. For workloads that stress these resources, such as large data sets or high-resolution rendering, the GRID K2 is the stronger choice.

However, the average benchmark score tells a different story. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 averages 9653 across its recorded tests, which is 19.5% higher than the GRID K2’s average of 8080. This is because the AMD card also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 10770, which is not available for the NVIDIA card. The GRID K2’s only additional benchmark is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 5557, pulling its average down.

The AMD card is also far more efficient. Its TDP of 35 W is a fraction of the GRID K2’s 225 W. It needs no external power connectors, while the GRID K2 requires a 6-pin and an 8-pin. The suggested PSU is 200 W versus 550 W. The AMD card is a single-slot design at 168 mm length, while the GRID K2 is a dual-slot design at 267 mm. The Radeon also provides display outputs, which the GRID K2 lacks entirely.

In short, the GRID K2 wins on absolute performance metrics that matter for compute-heavy tasks, but the Radeon Pro WX 2100 wins on efficiency, compactness, and average benchmark standing. Users needing a display output and low power draw should choose the AMD card. Users with a server environment, ample power budget, and a need for high FP32 and memory bandwidth should choose the NVIDIA card. The data does not support a single universal winner; the choice depends on the workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 | NVIDIA GRID K2 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | Lexa | GK104 |

| Process node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 3,540 million |

| Die size | 103 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor density | 21.4M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 925 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost clock | 1219 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory clock | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective | 1250 MHz, 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 48.00 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 512 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 32 | 128 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel rate | 19.50 GPixel/s | 23.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 39.01 GTexel/s | 95.36 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,248.3 GFLOPS | 2.289 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not listed |

| TDP | 35 W | 225 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.2.175 |

| Length | 168 mm (6.6 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | 69 mm (2.7 inches) | Not listed |

| Release date | 2017-06-03 | 2013-05-10 |

| Launch MSRP | 149 USD | 5,199 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA GRID K2 scores 10602, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 scores 8536. This gives the GRID K2 a 19.5% advantage. This is a substantial margin, reflecting the NVIDIA card’s larger shader count (1536 versus 512) and higher FP32 throughput (2.289 TFLOPS versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS). In raw compute tasks that scale with shader count, the GRID K2 is clearly ahead.

The AMD card’s best result comes from a different test. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 10770, which is higher than the GRID K2’s OpenCL score of 10602, but these are not directly comparable because they use different APIs. The Vulkan result is not recorded for the GRID K2, so no head-to-head comparison exists for that test. The GRID K2’s Geekbench Metal score is 5557, which is much lower than either of the AMD card’s scores, but again, the AMD card has no Metal benchmark recorded.

Looking at the broader picture, the average benchmark score favors the AMD card. The Radeon Pro WX 2100 averages 9653, while the GRID K2 averages 8080. This is a 19.5% difference in favor of AMD, identical in magnitude to the OpenCL delta but in the opposite direction. The reason is the benchmark set: AMD has two strong scores (8536 and 10770), while NVIDIA has one strong score (10602) and one weak score (5557). The Metal result drags down the NVIDIA average significantly.

The nearest rival data confirms that the AMD card sits in a higher performance tier. The Radeon Pro WX 2100’s closest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P4000, scores 9665, just 0.1% above AMD. The GeForce GTX 960M scores 9645, 0.1% below. These are all within a narrow band around 9650. The GRID K2, by contrast, sits near 8080, with rivals like the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost at 8067 and the GeForce 945M at 8099. The delta between the two cards’ average scores (9653 versus 8080) is much larger than the deltas among their respective nearest rivals, which are all under 0.6%.

The data shows a clear trade-off. The GRID K2 wins the only direct benchmark contest by a wide margin, and its memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s versus 48.00 GB/s) and texture rate (95.36 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s) are vastly superior. Yet the AMD card holds its own in the average score due to a strong Vulkan showing and a much lower power envelope. For a workload that uses OpenCL, the GRID K2 is the better performer. For a workload that uses Vulkan, the AMD card has the higher recorded score, though no direct comparison is available. The choice hinges on API support, power constraints, and physical space, not on a single performance metric.