AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Comparison

The data in this comparison is decisively one-sided. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 holds a commanding lead over the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 in every comparable benchmark, driven by a substantially larger GPU and a much higher power envelope. While the WX 3100 offers modern features and efficiency, the GTX 980's raw compute and graphics throughput place it in a different performance class.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a stark performance gap between the two cards. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 scores 34,676 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 manages only 7,333 points. This translates to a massive 372.9% advantage for the GTX 980, meaning it delivers nearly five times the compute performance in this workload. Such a disparity is not a marginal difference; it represents a fundamental chasm in processing capability.

The Geekbench Vulkan results tell a similar story, though with a slightly smaller margin. The GTX 980 achieves 22,543 points, leaving the WX 3100's 7,827 points far behind. The delta here is 188%, meaning the GTX 980 is nearly three times faster. While Vulkan is a modern API that the WX 3100 explicitly supports, the older Maxwell architecture of the GTX 980 still proves overwhelmingly superior in raw execution.

Beyond these direct comparisons, the overall benchmark averages reinforce the pattern. The GTX 980 has an average benchmark score of 8,167 across a wider range of tests, including PassMark DirectX 9/10/11/12 and G2D/G3D suites. The WX 3100's average, based solely on its two Geekbench results, is 7,580. This places the GTX 980 slightly ahead in aggregate, but the head-to-head deltas are where the real story lies. It is also worth remembering the GTX 980's PassMark G3D score of 11,095 and its PassMark GPU Compute score of 4,753 are far beyond anything the WX 3100 could produce, given its lower raw specs. The GTX 980 wins both head-to-head matchups, with the final tally at 2 wins for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is the primary reason for the performance disparity. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 is built on the GM204 chip using the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This chip packs 5,200 million transistors onto a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip based on GCN 4.0, built on a more modern 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This smaller chip contains only 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, but achieves a higher density of 21.4M per mm².

The core configuration differences are extreme. The GTX 980 features 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The WX 3100, by comparison, has only 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This 4:1 ratio in shading units and TMUs, and a 4:1 ratio in ROPs, explains why the GTX 980 achieves a pixel rate of 77.82 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 155.6 GTexel/s, versus the WX 3100's 19.50 GPixel/s and 39.01 GTexel/s. The compute throughput follows the same pattern, with the GTX 980 delivering 4.981 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the WX 3100 produces just 1,248.3 GFLOPS.

Memory subsystems also differ substantially. Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the GTX 980 uses a 256-bit bus to achieve 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 3100 is limited to a 128-bit bus, resulting in 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 980's memory clock is rated at 7 Gbps effective, compared to the WX 3100's 6 Gbps. Clock speeds themselves are closer, with the GTX 980 running at 1127 MHz base and 1216 MHz boost, while the WX 3100 runs at 925 MHz base and 1219 MHz boost. The higher boost clock on the AMD card cannot compensate for its much smaller core.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 is the clear winner for any workload that demands raw graphics or compute performance. Its 2,048 shading units and 64 ROPs make it suitable for high-resolution gaming, 3D rendering, and GPU-accelerated compute tasks. The data shows a 372.9% lead in OpenCL, which is a strong indicator for general-purpose compute, and a 188% lead in Vulkan, which matters for modern games and applications that use this API. With a PassMark G3D score of 11,095, it also handles legacy DirectX workloads with ease, as evidenced by its scores of 164 in DirectX 9 and 83 in DirectX 11.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, despite losing every comparison, has its own niche. Its 65 W TDP and single-slot design make it a low-power, compact solution. It requires no external power connectors and has a suggested PSU of only 250 W, versus the GTX 980's 165 W TDP, dual-slot width, 2x 6-pin connectors, and 450 W suggested PSU. The WX 3100 also features more modern display outputs, with 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the GTX 980 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2. For a workstation environment prioritizing low power consumption and a small footprint over peak performance, the WX 3100 is the practical choice. It also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, a feature absent from the GTX 980's specifications, which could matter for specific compute workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 is overwhelmingly faster. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 34,676 is 372.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100's score of 7,333.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The GTX 980 leads by 188% in the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 22,543 points versus the WX 3100's 7,827 points.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both feature 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the GTX 980 uses a 256-bit bus with 224.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the WX 3100 uses a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a 65 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 has a 165 W TDP and requires 2x 6-pin power connectors.

Q: Which card has a more modern manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 uses an older 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The GTX 980 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two cards differ:

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GM204 | Lexa |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 900 | Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 21.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1127 MHz | 925 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1216 MHz | 1219 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1753 MHz / 7 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz / 6 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.4 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 512 |

| TMUs | 128 | 32 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 77.82 GPixel/s | 19.50 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 155.6 GTexel/s | 39.01 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.981 TFLOPS | 1,248.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | N/A | 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 165 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Dimensions (LxH) | 267 mm x 111 mm | 168 mm x 69 mm |

| Release Date | 2014-09-18 | 2017-06-11 |

| Launch MSRP | 549 USD | 199 USD |