AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GRID K2 Comparison

The data presents a clear generation gap between two professional-grade GPUs from different eras. The NVIDIA GRID K2 is a 2013-era compute card built for virtualized environments, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is a 2017-era mobile workstation GPU. The benchmark results show the older card holds a significant performance edge in the one test available, but the comparison is far more nuanced when considering power, size, and intended use case.

The Verdict

For raw compute throughput, the NVIDIA GRID K2 is the clear winner in this head-to-head. In the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the GRID K2 scores 10,602 points against the Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7,333 points. That is a 44.6% advantage for the NVIDIA card. The GRID K2 also has a higher average benchmark score at 8,080 versus 7,580 for the AMD card, placing it at the 42nd percentile versus the AMD card's 41st.

However, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the card you would actually put in a desktop workstation. It has display outputs, draws only 65 W, and requires no auxiliary power connectors. The GRID K2 has no display outputs at all, draws 225 W, and needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector. The verdict is straightforward: pick the GRID K2 if you need maximum compute density for virtual GPU workloads or headless compute tasks. Pick the Radeon Pro WX 3100 if you need a low-power, single-slot workstation card with display connectivity. The AMD card's nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 1650 (1.4% faster) and the Radeon 540 (1.2% faster), while the GRID K2 sits right next to the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost (0.2% faster) and the GeForce 945M (0.2% slower).

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The NVIDIA GRID K2 is built on the Kepler architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip is GK104, which contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Its Lexa chip packs 2,200 million transistors into just 103 mm², giving it a much higher transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter.

The GRID K2 is fundamentally a compute-oriented card. Its Kepler design dates to an era before modern display controllers on the same die. The Radeon Pro WX 3100, with its GCN 4.0 architecture, is a Polaris-generation product designed for workstation graphics. This is reflected in the API support: the GRID K2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Radeon Pro WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD card has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Memory configurations differ substantially. Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5, but the GRID K2 uses a 256-bit bus delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a 128-bit bus providing 96.00 GB/s. The GRID K2's wider bus gives it a 66.7% bandwidth advantage. Clock speeds tell a different story: the Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a base clock of 925 MHz and a boost clock of 1,219 MHz, while the GRID K2's base and boost clocks are not listed. The AMD card also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the NVIDIA card does not list FP16 support.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a decisive win for the NVIDIA GRID K2. The GRID K2 scores 10,602 versus 7,333 for the Radeon Pro WX 3100, a margin of 44.6%. This is a massive difference that reflects the GRID K2's much larger compute footprint. The GRID K2 has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is three times the shading units, four times the TMUs, and double the ROPs on the NVIDIA card.

The GRID K2 also wins on fill rates. Its pixel rate is 23.84 GPixel/s versus 19.50 GPixel/s for the AMD card. Its texture rate is even more dominant at 95.36 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s, a 144.4% advantage. FP32 throughput follows the same pattern: the GRID K2 delivers 2.289 TFLOPS while the Radeon Pro WX 3100 delivers 1,248.3 GFLOPS (approximately 1.25 TFLOPS). The NVIDIA card is roughly 83% ahead in raw FP32 compute.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100 does have its own benchmark win to show. It scores 7,827 in Geekbench Vulkan, a test the GRID K2 does not list. This shows the AMD card is not a slouch in modern API workloads, but it cannot match the GRID K2's raw OpenCL performance. The average benchmark scores reinforce the gap: 8,080 for the GRID K2 versus 7,580 for the Radeon Pro WX 3100, a 6.6% difference in favor of NVIDIA.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every measurable specification. Here is where they part ways:

• Process node: NVIDIA is 28 nm, AMD is 14 nm.
• Die size: NVIDIA is 294 mm², AMD is 103 mm².
• Transistor count: NVIDIA has 3,540 million, AMD has 2,200 million.
• Transistor density: NVIDIA is 12.0M/mm², AMD is 21.4M/mm².
• Shading units: NVIDIA has 1,536, AMD has 512.
• TMUs: NVIDIA has 128, AMD has 32.
• ROPs: NVIDIA has 32, AMD has 16.
• Memory bus width: NVIDIA is 256-bit, AMD is 128-bit.
• Memory bandwidth: NVIDIA is 160.0 GB/s, AMD is 96.00 GB/s.
• Base clock: NVIDIA not listed, AMD is 925 MHz.
• Boost clock: NVIDIA not listed, AMD is 1,219 MHz.
• FP32 performance: NVIDIA is 2.289 TFLOPS, AMD is 1,248.3 GFLOPS.
• FP16 performance: NVIDIA not listed, AMD is 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: NVIDIA is 225 W, AMD is 65 W.
• Slot width: NVIDIA is dual-slot, AMD is single-slot.
• Power connectors: NVIDIA needs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin, AMD needs none.
• Suggested PSU: NVIDIA recommends 550 W, AMD recommends 250 W.
• Bus interface: NVIDIA is PCIe 3.0 x16, AMD is PCIe 3.0 x8.
• Display outputs: NVIDIA has none, AMD has 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Dimensions: NVIDIA is 267 mm long, AMD is 168 mm long and 69 mm tall.
• DirectX support: NVIDIA is 12 (11_0), AMD is 12 (12_0).
• Vulkan support: NVIDIA is 1.2.175, AMD is 1.3.
• Release date: NVIDIA is May 2013, AMD is June 2017.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the benchmark they share?

A: The NVIDIA GRID K2 wins decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 10,602 versus 7,333 for the Radeon Pro WX 3100, a 44.6% advantage.

Q: Can I use the NVIDIA GRID K2 for regular desktop display output?

A: No. The GRID K2 has no display outputs at all. The Radeon Pro WX 3100, by contrast, has 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100 is far more efficient. It has a 65 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the GRID K2 has a 225 W TDP and needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector. The AMD card also suggests a 250 W PSU versus 550 W for the NVIDIA card.

Q: How does the GRID K2 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GRID K2's average benchmark score of 8,080 puts it 0.2% ahead of the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost, 0.3% ahead of the GeForce GTX 650 Ti, and 0.5% ahead of the GeForce GTX 880M. It trails the GeForce 945M by 0.2%.

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

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100's average score of 7,580 places it 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 250, 0.4% ahead of the Intel Arc A310, and 1.4% ahead of the GeForce GTX 1650. It trails the AMD Radeon 540 by 1.2%.

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GRID K2 has significantly better memory bandwidth at 160.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, compared to 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus for the Radeon Pro WX 3100.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GRID K2 wins in raw compute performance across the board. It dominates in OpenCL, FP32 throughput, texture fill rate, and pixel fill rate. Its 2.289 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 95.36 GTexel/s texture rate, and 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the clear choice for compute-heavy virtual GPU workloads. This is a card designed for a server environment where power draw and slot width are secondary concerns to raw throughput. Its 1,536 shading units and 128 TMUs provide massive parallelism that the Radeon Pro WX 3100 cannot match.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins on practicality and modern features. It is a single-slot card that draws only 65 W and requires no auxiliary power connectors, making it easy to slot into almost any workstation. It has display outputs, which the GRID K2 lacks entirely. Its newer architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, both more modern than the GRID K2's DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The AMD card also has a notable win in the Vulkan benchmark, scoring 7,827, a test where the NVIDIA card has no listed result.

For a professional builder, the choice depends entirely on the workload. If the task is headless compute, virtual GPU sharing, or any workload where display output is irrelevant, the GRID K2's 44.6% OpenCL lead is impossible to ignore. If the task is a physical workstation with a monitor attached, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the only viable option between the two. The data shows two very different tools: one is a compute workhorse, the other is a compact workstation companion. Choose accordingly.