AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M and AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 represent two distinct approaches to mobile and compact professional graphics, separated by three years of architectural evolution. The GTX 880M is a 28 nm Kepler part from 2014, built for high-end laptops with an MXM form factor, while the WX 3100 is a 14 nm GCN 4.0 workstation card from 2017, designed as a single-slot, low-profile solution. Benchmark data shows the AMD card holds a decisive lead in the single head-to-head compute test, yet the two cards sit within 1 percentile point of each other in overall GPU rankings, indicating that their strengths manifest in different workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the clear winner in raw compute throughput as measured by the available benchmark data. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the WX 3100 scores 7,333 against the GTX 880M's 5,622, a margin of 23.3% in AMD's favor. This is the only direct head-to-head benchmark available, and AMD wins it outright. The WX 3100 also benefits from a more modern feature set, including DirectX 12 (12_0) support and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the GTX 880M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. For compute-heavy professional workloads that leverage OpenCL, the WX 3100 is the stronger performer.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, however, counters with superior raw hardware resources that may benefit certain legacy or geometry-bound tasks. It packs 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, versus the WX 3100's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 31.78 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 127.1 GTexel/s for the GTX 880M, compared to 19.50 GPixel/s and 39.01 GTexel/s for the WX 3100. The GTX 880M's FP32 throughput is 3.050 TFLOPS, more than double the WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS. In scenarios where raw shader count and fill-rate dominate — such as older DirectX 11 titles or specific OpenGL workloads — the GTX 880M's architecture provides a substantial hardware advantage, even if the available benchmark data does not directly capture this.

The data also indicates a split in ecosystem compatibility. The GTX 880M's average benchmark score is 8,040, placing it at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, while the WX 3100 averages 7,580 at the 41st percentile. This near-identical percentile ranking suggests that neither card dominates the other across the full spectrum of GPU tasks; instead, their wins are workload-specific. The WX 3100 wins in modern compute APIs, while the GTX 880M offers more raw throughput for traditional graphics pipelines.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting a three-year generational gap. The GTX 880M is built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It uses the GK104 chip, which contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0 million transistors per mm². This is a mature, high-power design from 2014, with a TDP of 122 W and an MXM Module slot width.

The WX 3100, in contrast, uses AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Its Lexa chip is far smaller and more efficient: 2,200 million transistors on just 103 mm², achieving a density of 21.4 million transistors per mm² — nearly double the GTX 880M's density. The WX 3100's TDP is 65 W, less than the GTX 880M's 122 W, and it occupies a single slot with a 168 mm length. This efficiency advantage is a direct result of the smaller process node and newer architecture.

The memory subsystems also differ fundamentally. The GTX 880M features 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 3100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 880M's wider bus and larger capacity favor high-resolution textures and data-heavy workloads, while the WX 3100's smaller footprint reflects its intended role as a compact professional card.

Feature support reveals another key divergence. The WX 3100 supports FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), a capability absent from the GTX 880M's specifications. The WX 3100 also offers a more modern display output suite: 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the GTX 880M's outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile design. The WX 3100's bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 880M uses MXM-B (3.0), a laptop-specific connector.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single available head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and it delivers an unambiguous result. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M scores 5,622. This represents a 23.3% advantage for AMD, as indicated by the deltaPct of -23.3 (negative signifying the GTX 880M is behind). This is a substantial margin in a compute-oriented benchmark, suggesting that the WX 3100's GCN 4.0 architecture is significantly more efficient at executing OpenCL workloads than Kepler, despite the GTX 880M's higher raw FP32 throughput.

This result is particularly notable because the GTX 880M's theoretical FP32 performance of 3.050 TFLOPS is 144% higher than the WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS. Yet in actual OpenCL execution, the WX 3100 outperforms the GTX 880M by nearly a quarter. This discrepancy highlights the architectural efficiency of GCN 4.0, which was designed with compute parallelism in mind, versus Kepler's more graphics-oriented design. The WX 3100's support for FP16 at the same rate as FP32 may also contribute to its OpenCL advantage, as certain compute kernels can leverage half-precision arithmetic.

The GTX 880M does have a second benchmark score from Geekbench Metal: 10,458. However, this is not a head-to-head comparison, as the WX 3100 does not support Metal and has no corresponding score. The GTX 880M's Metal score is its strongest individual result, indicating that Apple's graphics API is a particular strength for this NVIDIA part. The WX 3100, meanwhile, has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 7,827, which is actually higher than its OpenCL score of 7,333, suggesting the AMD card excels even more in Vulkan workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The most glaring difference is in processing resources: the GTX 880M has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the WX 3100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a 3x advantage in shading units and a 4x advantage in TMUs for NVIDIA, although the WX 3100's higher boost clock of 1,219 MHz (versus the GTX 880M's 993 MHz boost) partially compensates in clock-sensitive workloads.

Memory configuration is another major divergence. The GTX 880M offers 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the WX 3100 provides 4 GB on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 880M's memory clock is 1,250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the WX 3100 runs at 1,500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). Despite the WX 3100's faster per-pin speed, the GTX 880M's wider bus delivers 67% more bandwidth.

Power and physical specifications could not be more different. The GTX 880M draws 122 W and uses an MXM Module form factor with no power connectors, while the WX 3100 draws only 65 W, is a single-slot card, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The WX 3100 measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The GTX 880M has no listed dimensions, reflecting its mobile, laptop-integrated nature. The WX 3100's bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8, whereas the GTX 880M uses MXM-B (3.0).

Architecture and process technology also differ fundamentally. The GTX 880M uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm process with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip on a 14 nm process with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. The transistor density advantage goes to AMD at 21.4M/mm² versus 12.0M/mm² for NVIDIA. API support favors the WX 3100, which supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the GTX 880M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The WX 3100 also supports FP16 compute at 1,248.3 GFLOPS, a feature the GTX 880M lacks entirely.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, with 3.050 TFLOPS, is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100's 1,248.3 GFLOPS — a 144% advantage for NVIDIA in theoretical peak throughput.

Q: Why does the AMD card win the OpenCL benchmark despite lower FP32 specs?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 5,622 for the GTX 880M, a 23.3% margin. This indicates that GCN 4.0's compute architecture executes OpenCL kernels far more efficiently than Kepler, despite the GTX 880M's higher theoretical peak.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The GTX 880M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the WX 3100 has 4 GB on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 880M offers 67% more bandwidth and double the capacity.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 880M has a TDP of 122 W, while the WX 3100 draws only 65 W. This makes the AMD card nearly twice as power-efficient, consistent with its modern 14 nm process versus the 28 nm node used by the GTX 880M.

Q: Which card has better API support for modern games?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the GTX 880M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The AMD card also supports FP16 compute, which the GTX 880M does not.

Q: How do their overall GPU rankings compare?

A: The GTX 880M sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 8,040, while the WX 3100 is at the 41st percentile with an average score of 7,580. The 1-point percentile gap and 460-point score difference indicate they are closely matched overall, with strengths in different workload types.