AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs AMD Radeon R7 350 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 and AMD Radeon R7 350 are two end-of-life AMD GPUs that split their two head-to-head benchmark wins almost perfectly, yet the data reveals they are not interchangeable. The R7 350 takes the OpenCL crown, while the Pro WX 3100 dominates in Vulkan with a double-digit lead. Their average benchmark scores are close—7580 for the Pro WX 3100 versus 7425 for the R7 350—but the underlying architectures and performance profiles tell a more complex story about which card suits which workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head data is the Vulkan performance gap. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7827 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the AMD Radeon R7 350 manages only 7057. That is a 10.9% advantage for the Pro WX 3100, a substantial margin that suggests the newer GCN 4.0 architecture handles modern graphics APIs far more efficiently. The Pro WX 3100’s Vulkan score is also higher than its own OpenCL score of 7333, indicating that it scales well with compute-heavy rendering workloads.

Conversely, the R7 350 strikes back in OpenCL. It posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 7792, defeating the Pro WX 3100’s 7333 by 5.9%. This is a curious inversion: the R7 350, built on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, delivers better raw compute performance in this legacy API test. The R7 350’s OpenCL result also exceeds its Vulkan score by over 700 points, suggesting it is optimized for compute tasks that do not leverage modern graphics pipeline features.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, both cards sit in a similar performance tier. The Pro WX 3100 has an average benchmark score of 7580, landing it in the 41st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 with an average score of 7557 (a 0.3% delta) and the Intel Arc A310 at 7550 (0.4% ahead). Curiously, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 trails the Pro WX 3100 by 1.4%, with an average score of 7472. The Pro WX 3100 also edges out the AMD Radeon 540, which scores 7673, meaning the Pro WX 3100 is 1.2% behind that card.

The R7 350’s average score of 7425 places it in the 40th percentile, just one point below its rival. Its nearest rivals include the Intel UHD Graphics 750 at 7441 (a -0.2% delta), meaning the R7 350 is actually slightly ahead of that integrated solution. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7472, putting the R7 350 0.6% behind. The Intel Arc A310 at 7550 is 1.7% ahead of the R7 350. These deltas are all within a few percentage points, underscoring that neither card has a commanding lead in overall average performance, but the head-to-head results show clear specialization.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: pick the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 if your workload leans on Vulkan or modern API features, and pick the AMD Radeon R7 350 if OpenCL compute is your priority. The Pro WX 3100’s 10.9% Vulkan advantage is significant, while the R7 350’s 5.9% OpenCL win is smaller but still decisive. For users who run a mix of both, the Pro WX 3100’s higher average score (7580 versus 7425) and better percentile ranking (41st versus 40th) give it a slight edge in overall versatility. However, the R7 350 is not a clear loser—its OpenCL dominance means it remains relevant for specific compute tasks.

The Pro WX 3100 also benefits from a more modern feature set. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 350 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Vulkan support is also newer on the Pro WX 3100, with version 1.3 versus 1.2.170 on the R7 350. These API differences align with the benchmark results, as the Pro WX 3100’s Vulkan score reflects its ability to utilize advanced rendering techniques. For anyone targeting current or near-future software, the Pro WX 3100 is the safer choice.

That said, the R7 350’s lower power draw (55 W versus 65 W) and identical 250 W suggested PSU requirement make it a viable option for power-constrained builds. The R7 350 also has a wider PCIe interface (PCIe 3.0 x16 versus x8 on the Pro WX 3100), which could matter for bandwidth-sensitive compute workloads despite the older architecture. Ultimately, the verdict hinges on API preference: Vulkan users should choose the Pro WX 3100, while OpenCL-centric applications favor the R7 350.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads, as evidenced by its 7827 score versus 7057 for the R7 350. This includes modern game engines and graphics applications that leverage Vulkan’s low-overhead design. The Pro WX 3100’s GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process, likely contributes to better draw-call handling and more efficient command processing. Its FP16 performance is also notable—matching FP32 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS—which can accelerate certain machine learning and image processing tasks that use half-precision arithmetic.

The Pro WX 3100 also wins on memory capacity with 4 GB of GDDR5 versus 2 GB on the R7 350. That extra memory, combined with higher bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s), makes it better suited for texture-heavy workloads or larger datasets. Its pixel rate of 19.50 GPixel/s and texture rate of 39.01 GTexel/s are both substantially higher than the R7 350’s 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s, indicating stronger fill-rate performance for resolution-heavy rendering.

The AMD Radeon R7 350 wins in OpenCL compute, posting 7792 against the Pro WX 3100’s 7333. This suggests that legacy compute shaders or OpenCL-accelerated applications run faster on the R7 350, despite its older GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm process. The R7 350 also has a lower TDP of 55 W, which may appeal to users building compact or low-noise systems. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width of the Pro WX 3100, potentially reducing data transfer bottlenecks in compute tasks that move large buffers between CPU and GPU.

Neither card wins on raw transistor count—the Pro WX 3100 has 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, while the R7 350 has 1,500 million on a larger 123 mm² die. However, the Pro WX 3100’s higher transistor density (21.4M / mm² versus 12.2M / mm²) indicates a more advanced manufacturing process, which likely explains its superior Vulkan efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 has an average benchmark score of 7580, while the AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425. The Pro WX 3100 also ranks in the 41st percentile of all GPUs, versus 40th for the R7 350.

Q: How big is the Vulkan performance difference?

A: The Pro WX 3100 scores 7827 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 10.9% higher than the R7 350’s 7057. This is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head results.

Q: Does the R7 350 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the R7 350 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 7792, beating the Pro WX 3100’s 7333 by 5.9%.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Pro WX 3100 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the R7 350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The Pro WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the R7 350 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Pro WX 3100 is also newer, released in 2017 versus 2016 for the R7 350.

Q: Are their power requirements similar?

A: The R7 350 has a lower TDP of 55 W compared to 65 W for the Pro WX 3100. Both have a suggested PSU of 250 W and use no power connectors.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD’s GCN architecture. The Pro WX 3100 uses GCN 4.0 with the Lexa chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This newer node allows for 2,200 million transistors packed into a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4M / mm². The R7 350, by contrast, relies on GCN 1.0 with the Cape Verde chip, built on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It contains 1,500 million transistors on a larger 123 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 12.2M / mm².

These architectural differences manifest in clock speeds and compute rates. The Pro WX 3100 has a base clock of 925 MHz and a boost clock of 1219 MHz, while the R7 350’s base and boost clocks are not specified in the data. The Pro WX 3100 achieves 1,248.3 GFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same figure for FP16 (1:1 ratio), whereas the R7 350 delivers only 819.2 GFLOPS of FP32 with no FP16 data available. This makes the Pro WX 3100 roughly 52% faster in theoretical FP32 throughput.

The memory subsystems also reflect the generational gap. The Pro WX 3100 runs its GDDR5 memory at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), producing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 350’s memory is clocked at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective), yielding 72.00 GB/s. Both have 128-bit buses, but the Pro WX 3100’s higher clock speed gives it a one-third bandwidth advantage. Pixel and texture rates follow suit, with the Pro WX 3100 hitting 19.50 GPixel/s and 39.01 GTexel/s versus 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s for the R7 350.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is memory capacity: the Pro WX 3100 ships with 4 GB of GDDR5, double the R7 350’s 2 GB. This directly impacts the ability to handle larger textures or datasets. Bandwidth also differs, with the Pro WX 3100 offering 96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s for the R7 350. The bus interface is another differentiator—the Pro WX 3100 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the R7 350 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, giving the latter more potential bandwidth to the host system.

Clock speeds are a major divergence. The Pro WX 3100 has a base clock of 925 MHz and a boost clock of 1219 MHz, while the R7 350’s clocks are not listed. The Pro WX 3100’s memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) compared to 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) on the R7 350. These clock differences drive the Pro WX 3100’s superior pixel rate (19.50 GPixel/s versus 12.80 GPixel/s) and texture rate (39.01 GTexel/s versus 25.60 GTexel/s).

Display outputs also differ. The Pro WX 3100 provides 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the R7 350 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The Pro WX 3100’s newer DisplayPort version supports higher resolutions and refresh rates. Power consumption favors the R7 350 at 55 W TDP versus 65 W for the Pro WX 3100, though both require a 250 W PSU and have no power connectors. The Pro WX 3100 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD, while the R7 350 has no listed launch price.