AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 represent two very different approaches to graphics hardware, separated by nearly three years of release dates and aimed at distinct segments of the market. The WX 3100 is a professional workstation card built on a modern 14nm process with a focus on efficiency, while the GTX 970 is a consumer gaming card from the Maxwell generation, built on a larger 28nm process with significantly more raw compute resources. Benchmark data shows the GTX 970 dominating in raw performance, but the WX 3100 holds its own in specific professional contexts, making the choice between them highly dependent on the intended workload.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results paint a clear picture of performance disparity, with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 winning both recorded tests decisively. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 970 scores 29,982 against the Radeon Pro WX 3100’s 7,333, representing a delta of -75.5% for the AMD card. This is a massive gap that indicates the GTX 970 delivers roughly four times the compute throughput in this particular workload. The Vulkan test shows a similar pattern, with the GTX 970 scoring 20,005 versus 7,827 for the WX 3100, a -60.9% delta. These numbers suggest that for any general-purpose compute or API-accelerated graphics task, the GTX 970 is the unequivocal performance winner.

However, the WX 3100’s advantage lies not in raw speed but in its professional positioning and efficiency profile. The card is designed for workstation environments, with a 65 W TDP compared to the GTX 970’s 148 W, and it requires no external power connectors, running entirely off the PCIe slot’s power budget. The GTX 970, by contrast, demands two 6-pin power connectors and a 300 W suggested PSU versus the WX 3100’s 250 W requirement. For multi-GPU workstation builds or systems with tight power budgets, the WX 3100’s lower consumption and single-slot form factor (168 mm length versus 267 mm) offer practical advantages that no benchmark score can capture. The WX 3100 also supports DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the GTX 970 is limited to DisplayPort 1.2, which matters for high-resolution professional displays.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 2,200 million transistors into a compact 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 uses the GM204 chip with Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This older process results in 5,200 million transistors spread across a much larger 398 mm² die, with a lower density of 13.1 million per square millimeter.

These architectural differences translate into vastly different compute resources. The GTX 970 features 1,664 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 56 render output units, compared to the WX 3100’s 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This explains the GTX 970’s massive performance lead: it has more than three times the shading units and more than three times the TMUs. The pixel rate tells a similar story, with the GTX 970 achieving 65.97 GPixel/s versus 19.50 GPixel/s for the WX 3100, and texture rates of 122.5 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s. The GTX 970’s FP32 throughput of 3.920 TFLOPS dwarfs the WX 3100’s 1,248.3 GFLOPS, though the WX 3100 does offer FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, a feature the GTX 970 lacks entirely.

Memory subsystems also diverge significantly. Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5, but the GTX 970 uses a 256-bit bus delivering 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the WX 3100 operates on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 970’s memory clock is 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the WX 3100. The GTX 970 also supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 3100 tops out at DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.3, though both offer OpenGL 4.6. The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 970 versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the WX 3100, which can affect bandwidth in some workloads.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 wins both head-to-head benchmarks with deltas of -75.5% and -60.9% in OpenCL and Vulkan, respectively. Its average benchmark score of 7,157, while lower than the WX 3100’s 7,580 average, is dragged down by a wide range of results including older DirectX 9 and 10 tests, whereas the WX 3100 only has two modern API scores. In the specific head-to-head tests, the GTX 970 is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing compute performance or gaming. Its percentile ranking of 39 versus the WX 3100’s 41 is a statistical artifact of different benchmark suites, not a reflection of real-world capability.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100, however, is not without merit. Its 65 W TDP, single-slot design, lack of power connectors, and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it a compelling option for compact workstations or systems where power efficiency and physical footprint matter more than peak throughput. The card’s professional Radeon Pro branding suggests driver optimizations for workstation applications, though benchmark data does not directly measure this. For users running OpenCL workloads that fit within its 4 GB memory and 96 GB/s bandwidth, the WX 3100 offers a functional, low-power solution. The GTX 970, with its 148 W TDP and dual-slot requirement, is a bulkier, hungrier card that excels in performance but demands more from the system. Choose the GTX 970 for performance, the WX 3100 for efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better raw compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 is significantly faster, scoring 29,982 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 7,333 for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, a difference of -75.5% for the AMD card.

Q: How does the power consumption compare between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a 65 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 has a 148 W TDP and needs two 6-pin power connectors.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 970 provides 224.4 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the WX 3100 offers 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. Both have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: Which card supports newer display outputs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 supports DisplayPort 1.4a, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 only supports DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 970 does offer HDMI 2.0, which the WX 3100 lacks.

Q: Are there differences in Vulkan API support?

A: Yes, the GTX 970 supports Vulkan 1.4 while the WX 3100 supports Vulkan 1.3. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the GTX 970 scores 20,005 versus 7,827 for the WX 3100.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of each card?

A: The WX 3100 is 168 mm long and 69 mm tall, occupying a single slot. The GTX 970 is 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, occupying a dual-slot configuration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head data is the Geekbench OpenCL score, where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 achieves 29,982 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100’s 7,333. This -75.5% delta represents a roughly four-fold performance advantage for the GTX 970, a margin that reflects the fundamental resource disparity between the two cards. The GTX 970’s 1,664 shading units and 3.920 TFLOPS of FP32 compute simply overwhelm the WX 3100’s 512 shading units and 1,248.3 GFLOPS. In practical terms, OpenCL workloads such as physics simulations, image processing, or data-parallel computation will complete in roughly a quarter of the time on the GTX 970.

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap slightly but still favors the GTX 970 decisively. Here, the NVIDIA card scores 20,005 versus 7,827 for the AMD card, a -60.9% delta. While the relative margin is smaller than in OpenCL, the absolute difference remains enormous. Vulkan is a modern low-overhead API, and the GTX 970’s support for version 1.4 versus the WX 3100’s 1.3 gives it a protocol advantage on top of its hardware superiority. The GTX 970 also benefits from its 224.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is more than double the WX 3100’s 96.00 GB/s, a factor that heavily influences memory-bound graphics workloads.

Looking beyond the head-to-head tests, the GTX 970’s broader benchmark suite reveals strengths in legacy APIs. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 143 and DirectX 11 score of 71 indicate solid performance in older titles, while the WX 3100 has no comparable legacy data. The GTX 970 also posts a Passmark G3D score of 9,638 and a GPU compute score of 4,073, demonstrating well-rounded capabilities. The WX 3100’s average benchmark score of 7,580 is actually higher than the GTX 970’s 7,157, but this is misleading: the WX 3100’s average is derived from just two modern tests, while the GTX 970’s includes eleven tests spanning everything from DirectX 9 to Metal. The GTX 970’s Geekbench Metal score of 13,595 further illustrates its versatility, though this test is not available for the AMD card. For any workload where performance matters, the GTX 970 is the data-backed winner; the WX 3100’s value lies entirely in its efficiency and professional form factor.