AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall victory for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, which wins both head-to-head tests against the AMD Radeon R7 M350. The most decisive gap appears in the Vulkan API test, where the Pro WX 3100 posts a score of 7,827 against 5,662 for the R7 M350, a substantial 38.2% advantage. This is not a marginal difference; it indicates a fundamental performance tier gap in modern graphics workloads.

In the OpenCL test, the Pro WX 3100 again leads, scoring 7,333 versus 6,991 for the R7 M350, a narrower but still meaningful 4.9% advantage. While the OpenCL margin is modest, the Vulkan result amplifies the overall performance separation between these two mobile-oriented GPUs.

Looking at the average benchmark score, the Pro WX 3100 records 7,580, placing it in the 41st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The R7 M350 averages 6,327, which lands in the 36th percentile. This percentile gap of five points confirms that the Pro WX 3100 sits in a slightly higher performance tier overall, even if neither card is positioned near the top of the database.

The nearest rivals for each card provide additional context. The Pro WX 3100's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R7 250, with an average score of 7,557, just 0.3% behind. The Intel Arc A310 trails by 0.4% at 7,550, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is 1.4% behind at 7,472. The AMD Radeon 540 is the only rival ahead, posting 7,673, a 1.2% lead over the Pro WX 3100. These tight margins indicate the Pro WX 3100 sits in a densely packed performance cluster.

For the R7 M350, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100, with a matching average score of 6,330, a 0% delta. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 trails by 0.7% at 6,282, while both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER and the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 sit 0.9% ahead at 6,270. This puts the R7 M350 in a lower performance neighborhood, roughly 1,250 points below the Pro WX 3100's average.

The Vulkan delta of 38.2% is the standout number in this comparison. It suggests that the Pro WX 3100's architecture handles modern API workloads with far greater efficiency, likely due to its newer GCN 4.0 design and higher memory bandwidth. The OpenCL result, while smaller, still favors the Pro WX 3100, reinforcing a consistent performance advantage across both tested APIs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins in both benchmark categories, so the use-case split is straightforward. In OpenCL workloads, which typically represent compute tasks such as image processing, physics simulations, and general-purpose GPU compute, the Pro WX 3100 holds a 4.9% edge. This is a modest but consistent lead, suitable for users who need reliable compute performance in professional applications.

The Vulkan test shows the Pro WX 3100 at a 38.2% advantage, making it the clear choice for modern gaming and graphics APIs. Vulkan is increasingly common in game engines and cross-platform graphics, so this gap directly translates to better performance in current and upcoming titles that utilize Vulkan. For users prioritizing Vulkan-based software, the Pro WX 3100 is the only sensible pick between these two.

The R7 M350, by contrast, records no wins in either test. Its OpenCL score of 6,991 is within striking distance of the Pro WX 3100's 7,333, so in compute-heavy scenarios the difference may be less noticeable. However, the Vulkan deficit is severe, meaning the R7 M350 should be avoided for Vulkan-centric workloads.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this split. The Pro WX 3100's 7,580 average is 19.8% higher than the R7 M350's 6,327, a substantial overall performance gap. The percentile rankings also differ, with the Pro WX 3100 at 41% and the R7 M350 at 36%, placing the former in a higher performance bracket.

For users who run a mix of OpenCL and Vulkan tasks, the Pro WX 3100 offers the superior overall package. The R7 M350 may still suffice for purely compute-focused applications where the OpenCL gap is small, but the database shows no scenario where the R7 M350 overtakes the Pro WX 3100. The verdict is unambiguous: the Pro WX 3100 wins all recorded benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 in Vulkan?

A: The Pro WX 3100 scores 7,827 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R7 M350 scores 5,662, giving the Pro WX 3100 a 38.2% advantage.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The Pro WX 3100 averages 7,580, while the R7 M350 averages 6,327, a difference of 1,253 points in favor of the Pro WX 3100.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Pro WX 3100 sits in the 41st percentile, while the R7 M350 sits in the 36th percentile, a gap of five percentile points.

Q: How close is the R7 M350 to its nearest rival?

A: The R7 M350's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100, with a matching average score of 6,330, showing a 0% delta.

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

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333 versus 6,991 for the R7 M350, a 4.9% difference.

Q: Does the R7 M350 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No, the R7 M350 loses both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, recording zero wins against the Pro WX 3100.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The Pro WX 3100 uses a 14 nm process node, while the R7 M350 uses a 28 nm node. The Pro WX 3100's chip, Lexa, contains 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, while the R7 M350's Meso chip has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 21.4M per mm² for the Pro WX 3100 versus 12.4M per mm² for the R7 M350.

Clock speeds also favor the Pro WX 3100, with a base of 925 MHz and a boost of 1,219 MHz, compared to the R7 M350's base of 1,000 MHz and boost of 1,015 MHz. The memory subsystem is another major divergence: the Pro WX 3100 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the R7 M350 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock rates are 1,500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the Pro WX 3100 versus 1,000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) for the R7 M350.

Compute unit counts differ as well. The Pro WX 3100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the R7 M350 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel and texture rates follow accordingly: the Pro WX 3100 achieves 19.50 GPixel/s and 39.01 GTexel/s, while the R7 M350 manages 8.120 GPixel/s and 24.36 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,248.3 GFLOPS for the Pro WX 3100 versus 779.5 GFLOPS for the R7 M350, and both have 1:1 FP16 rates.

Power characteristics also differ. The Pro WX 3100 has a TDP of 65 W, a single-slot design, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The R7 M350 has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or PSU recommendation in the database. The Pro WX 3100 also has display outputs (1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a), while the R7 M350 has no recorded display outputs. The Pro WX 3100 measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the R7 M350 has no recorded dimensions. Release dates are 2017-06-11 for the Pro WX 3100 and 2015-05-04 for the R7 M350. The Pro WX 3100 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD, while the R7 M350 has no recorded MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is significant. The Pro WX 3100 is built on GCN 4.0 architecture with the Lexa chip, part of the Radeon Pro Polaris generation. The R7 M350 uses GCN 3.0 architecture with the Meso chip, from the Gem System (R7 M300) generation. The Pro WX 3100 is fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process, while the R7 M350 is fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This process difference explains the higher transistor density of the Pro WX 3100.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: the Pro WX 3100 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 M350 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The newer Vulkan version on the Pro WX 3100 likely contributes to its 38.2% Vulkan benchmark advantage. Both use PCIe 3.0 x8 interfaces.

The memory architecture is a defining difference. The Pro WX 3100's GDDR5 memory with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth provides 6 times the bandwidth of the R7 M350's DDR3 at 16.00 GB/s. This enormous bandwidth gap, combined with the 128-bit versus 64-bit bus width, explains why the Pro WX 3100 maintains a lead in both compute and graphics tests despite its lower base clock.

The production status for both cards is end-of-life. The Pro WX 3100's predecessor is the Radeon Pro GCN, and its successor is the Radeon Pro Vega. The R7 M350's predecessor is the Solar System, and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The lack of RT cores and tensor cores on both cards indicates neither supports ray tracing or tensor acceleration.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the superior GPU in every recorded benchmark, winning both OpenCL and Vulkan tests. Its 38.2% Vulkan advantage is decisive for any modern graphics workload, and its 4.9% OpenCL lead, while smaller, still holds up. With an average score of 7,580 versus 6,327, the Pro WX 3100 outperforms the R7 M350 by 19.8%.

Users should pick the Pro WX 3100 if they need a professional-grade card with modern API support, higher memory bandwidth, and better compute throughput. Its 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, 1,248.3 GFLOPS FP32 performance, and 512 shading units make it the clear choice for Vulkan-based games or OpenCL compute tasks. The R7 M350, with its older GCN 3.0 architecture, DDR3 memory at 16.00 GB/s, and 779.5 GFLOPS FP32, cannot keep pace.

The only scenario where the R7 M350 might be considered is if a system requires its lower base clock of 1,000 MHz or its specific 28 nm fabrication. However, the database shows no performance advantage for the R7 M350 in any test. Its Vulkan score of 5,662 is 2,165 points below the Pro WX 3100, and its OpenCL score of 6,991 is 342 points behind.

For users prioritizing modern graphics APIs, the Pro WX 3100 is the only rational choice. For those focused purely on OpenCL compute, the 4.9% gap is small enough that the R7 M350 could suffice, but the Pro WX 3100 still leads. The percentile rankings confirm the hierarchy: 41st versus 36th. The verdict is unambiguous, the Pro WX 3100 wins on every measurable metric in this comparison.