AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce 945M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between the NVIDIA GeForce 945M and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results show a clear, albeit modest, advantage for the NVIDIA part. The GeForce 945M scores 8,099 points against the Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7,333 points, a delta of 10.4 percent. This is not a marginal difference; a 10.4 percent lead is meaningful in real-world compute workloads, placing the NVIDIA chip in a distinctly higher performance tier than its AMD counterpart.

Contextualizing these scores against their respective nearest rivals reinforces this separation. The GeForce 945M sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, with its closest competitor being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M at 8,135 points (a 0.4 percent deficit) and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 at 8,129 points (a 0.4 percent deficit). The 945M's score is also 0.4 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GRID K2 and 0.2 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost. This cluster of rivals, all within 0.4 percent of each other, indicates that the 945M is performing exactly where its architecture and specification sheet would suggest — solidly in the mid-range mobile segment.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100, in contrast, lands at the 41st percentile, just one point below the 945M in overall standing. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 540 at 7,673 points (a 1.2 percent deficit) and the Intel Arc A310 at 7,550 points (a 0.4 percent deficit). The WX 3100 is 0.3 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 250 and 1.4 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650. This rival set shows the WX 3100 competing with entry-level desktop and low-end mobile parts, while the 945M rubs shoulders with faster mobile GTX-class hardware. The 10.4 percent delta between the two cards in this head-to-head is therefore not an outlier; it reflects a genuine gap in compute throughput.

The architecture behind this performance difference is instructive. The 945M runs 640 shading units at a boost clock of 1,020 MHz, while the WX 3100 has 512 shading units but a higher boost clock of 1,219 MHz. Raw FP32 throughput is nearly identical — 1,305.6 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA part versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS for the AMD part — so the OpenCL score gap must come from other factors, such as driver efficiency, memory subsystem behavior, or the specific workload composition of Geekbench OpenCL. The 945M also holds a small edge in texture rate (40.80 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s), though the WX 3100 counters with a higher pixel rate (19.50 GPixel/s versus 16.32 GPixel/s).

One additional benchmark exists for the Radeon Pro WX 3100 that has no counterpart for the 945M: Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 7,827 points. This score sits above its OpenCL result, suggesting the GCN 4.0 architecture handles Vulkan compute reasonably well, but without a 945M Vulkan score, no direct comparison can be drawn. The absence of a Vulkan result for the NVIDIA card is notable, as it limits the scope of the analysis to OpenCL only.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 945M wins decisively, scoring 8,099 points versus the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7,333 points, a 10.4 percent advantage.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro WX 3100 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The WX 3100's average benchmark score is 7,580 points. It is 1.4 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, 0.4 percent ahead of the Intel Arc A310, and 0.3 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 250, but 1.2 percent behind the AMD Radeon 540.

Q: Where does the GeForce 945M rank among all GPUs?

A: The 945M sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8,099 points. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8,135 points, putting the 945M 0.4 percent behind.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 3100 have any benchmark advantage?

A: The WX 3100 has a Vulkan score of 7,827 points, which is higher than its OpenCL score of 7,333 points. However, no Vulkan score exists for the 945M, so no head-to-head comparison is possible for that API.

Q: What is the percentile difference between the two GPUs?

A: The 945M is at the 42nd percentile, while the WX 3100 is at the 41st percentile — a difference of only one percentile point, despite a 10.4 percent gap in raw OpenCL scores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The 945M has a slightly higher FP32 rating at 1,305.6 GFLOPS, compared to the WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS. The WX 3100 does offer FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1), while the 945M has no listed FP16 capability.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for compute-intensive workloads: the NVIDIA GeForce 945M is the faster GPU in OpenCL, outperforming the Radeon Pro WX 3100 by 10.4 percent. If the primary use case is general-purpose compute or any workload that relies on OpenCL, the 945M is the clear choice, despite being an older part with a smaller memory footprint.

However, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 brings several attributes that the 945M lacks, which could tip the scale for specific users. It offers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory versus the 945M's 2 GB of DDR3, and its memory bandwidth is more than triple — 96.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bound rather than compute-bound, this bandwidth advantage could be decisive, even if the raw compute score is lower. The WX 3100 also has a lower TDP at 65 W versus 75 W, and it supports DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the 945M's DirectX 12 (11_0), which matters for modern graphics API compatibility.

The 945M's nearest rivals in terms of score — the GTX 950M, R9 M360, GRID K2, and GTX 650 Ti Boost — are all parts that would be considered mid-range in their respective generations. The WX 3100's rivals — the R7 250, Arc A310, Radeon 540, and GTX 1650 — skew slightly lower in the pecking order. This reinforces the notion that the 945M is competing in a higher performance tier overall.

For a user who prioritizes maximum compute throughput and does not need large memory capacity, the GeForce 945M is the data-supported pick. For a user who needs more VRAM, higher memory bandwidth, lower power draw, or newer API support, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the more balanced option, even if it loses the direct OpenCL comparison. The WX 3100's Vulkan score of 7,827 points, while not comparable to the 945M, suggests it can hold its own in Vulkan-based workloads where the 945M has no measured presence.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The NVIDIA GeForce 945M uses a 28 nm process node from TSMC, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses a 14 nm node from GlobalFoundries. The 945M has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, whereas the WX 3100 packs 2,200 million transistors into 103 mm², giving it a significantly higher transistor density of 21.4M / mm² versus 12.6M / mm².

Clock speeds differ notably: the 945M has a base clock of 928 MHz and a boost clock of 1,020 MHz, while the WX 3100's base clock is 925 MHz but its boost clock reaches 1,219 MHz. Memory configurations are starkly different: the 945M has 2 GB of DDR3 at 900 MHz (1,800 Mbps effective) with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, while the WX 3100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1,500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus.

Shader and texture hardware also diverges: the 945M has 640 shading units and 40 texture mapping units, while the WX 3100 has 512 shading units and 32 TMUs. Both have 16 ROPs. The 945M has a higher texture rate (40.80 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s), but the WX 3100 has a higher pixel rate (19.50 GPixel/s versus 16.32 GPixel/s). FP32 is nearly identical at 1,305.6 GFLOPS versus 1,248.3 GFLOPS, but the WX 3100 adds FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1).

Power and form factor differ: the 945M is a 75 W MXM module with no power connectors and an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the WX 3100 is a 65 W single-slot card with no power connectors, a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. Display outputs differ: the 945M is listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the WX 3100 has 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions are only specified for the WX 3100: 168 mm (6.6 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) high.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and fundamental. The NVIDIA GeForce 945M is built on the Maxwell architecture, using the GM107 chip, and belongs to the GeForce 900M generation. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Lexa chip, part of the Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) generation. Maxwell is a 2014-era design, while GCN 4.0 (Polaris) is a 2016-era design, which explains the process node difference — 28 nm for the 945M, 14 nm for the WX 3100.

The transistor budgets reflect the architectural philosophy. The 945M uses 1,870 million transistors across 148 mm², while the WX 3100 uses 2,200 million transistors in a smaller 103 mm² die. The higher density of the GCN 4.0 part (21.4M / mm² versus 12.6M / mm²) comes from the more advanced 14 nm process, allowing more transistors per area despite the smaller physical footprint.

Core configuration reveals different design priorities. The 945M allocates its transistor budget to 640 shading units and 40 TMUs, while the WX 3100 devotes fewer resources to shading (512 units) and texturing (32 TMUs) but compensates with a much higher boost clock (1,219 MHz versus 1,020 MHz). This yields nearly identical FP32 throughput, but the AMD part achieves it with fewer, faster cores, while the NVIDIA part uses more, slower cores.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The 945M uses DDR3 at 1,800 Mbps effective, while the WX 3100 uses GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective. Both have 128-bit buses, but the GDDR5's much higher data rate produces 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth versus 28.80 GB/s — a 3.3x difference. The memory capacities also differ at 2 GB versus 4 GB.

Feature support separates them further. The 945M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: the 945M lists Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 3100 lists Vulkan 1.3. The 945M has no FP16 capability listed, while the WX 3100 has FP16 at 1:1 ratio with FP32. The WX 3100 also has a longer list of display outputs and a specified physical size, reflecting its workstation-oriented design as a single-slot card, whereas the 945M's MXM form factor is a mobile module.