AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 and NVIDIA Quadro M5000M are both end-of-life mobile workstation GPUs, but they target very different segments of the market. The database records show a clear performance gap between them, with the Quadro M5000M dominating in every benchmark where both cards were measured. However, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 still holds relevance for specific use cases due to its efficiency and modern feature set. This analysis breaks down where each card wins, who should buy which, and the architectural and specification differences that explain their behavior.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded head-to-head benchmark data shows the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M winning both tests outright. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro M5000M scores 22,920 versus the Radeon Pro WX 3100's 7,333, a delta of -68% for the AMD card. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro M5000M scores 24,875 versus 7,827, a delta of -68.5%. There is no benchmark in the database where the Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins against the Quadro M5000M, with a wins tally of 0 for the AMD card and 2 for the NVIDIA card.

That said, the Radeon Pro WX 3100's wins are not in raw performance but in operational characteristics. The AMD card uses a 14 nm process node from GlobalFoundries, while the Quadro M5000M uses a 28 nm node from TSMC. The smaller node gives the Radeon Pro WX 3100 a substantial transistor density advantage at 21.4 million transistors per square millimeter versus 13.1 million for the Quadro M5000M. The AMD card also has a lower TDP of 65 W compared to 100 W, making it more suitable for compact or thermally constrained systems. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, whereas the Quadro M5000M is an MXM module, which limits its compatibility to specific laptop chassis. The AMD card also supports newer API versions, including Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Quadro M5000M supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), but the AMD card has a more recent release date of June 2017 versus August 2015 for the NVIDIA card.

For users prioritizing power efficiency, modern API support, and a simple single-slot form factor, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the more practical choice. For users needing maximum compute throughput, the Quadro M5000M is the only option between the two.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: pick the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M if your workload demands raw compute performance, and pick the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 if your priority is efficiency, lower power draw, and a simpler physical design. The Quadro M5000M delivers more than triple the OpenCL score of the Radeon Pro WX 3100, with a 22,920 versus 7,333, and more than triple the Vulkan score, with 24,875 versus 7,827. Those deltas are massive, at -68% and -68.5% respectively, meaning the AMD card is not competitive in raw throughput.

However, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a higher percentile ranking at 41 versus 37 for the Quadro M5000M, despite the latter having higher absolute scores. This is because the Quadro M5000M's average benchmark score is 6,481, which includes several Passmark tests where it scores very low, such as 35 in DirectX 10, 54 in DirectX 11, 29 in DirectX 12, and 119 in DirectX 9. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 does not have those Passmark scores recorded, so its average of 7,580 is based solely on the two Geekbench tests. This discrepancy means the Quadro M5000M's overall average is dragged down by legacy DirectX workloads, while the Radeon Pro WX 3100 appears more consistent in the recorded data.

If you need a card for modern compute tasks like OpenCL or Vulkan rendering, the Quadro M5000M is the clear winner. If you need a low-power, single-slot card for a workstation that prioritizes API compliance and thermal headroom, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the better fit. The Quadro M5000M's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile with a delta of 0.1%, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M with a delta of -0.2%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M with a delta of -0.5%, and the Intel UHD Graphics P750 with a delta of -1.1%. These close margins show that the Quadro M5000M sits in a crowded mid-range tier. In contrast, the Radeon Pro WX 3100's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 with a delta of 0.3%, the Intel Arc A310 with a delta of 0.4%, the AMD Radeon 540 with a delta of -1.2%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 with a delta of 1.4%, placing it in a similar performance band.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Quadro M5000M scores 22,920, while the Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333. That is a 68% deficit for the AMD card. In practical terms, this means the Quadro M5000M handles compute-heavy tasks like rendering, simulation, and data processing at roughly three times the speed of the Radeon Pro WX 3100. The delta is so large that no amount of driver optimization or workload tuning could close the gap.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a similar pattern. The Quadro M5000M scores 24,875, and the Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,827, a delta of -68.5%. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that benefits from raw shader throughput, and the Quadro M5000M has 1,536 shading units compared to 512 on the Radeon Pro WX 3100. The NVIDIA card also has 96 texture mapping units and 64 render output units, versus 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs on the AMD card. These hardware differences directly translate to the benchmark numbers.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100 does have a higher boost clock at 1,219 MHz versus 1,051 MHz for the Quadro M5000M, but that does not compensate for the massive difference in core counts. The AMD card's peak FP32 throughput is 1,248.3 GFLOPS, while the Quadro M5000M reaches 3.229 TFLOPS, more than double. The Quadro M5000M also has a higher pixel rate at 67.26 GPixel/s versus 19.50 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate at 100.9 GTexel/s versus 39.01 GTexel/s. These are not marginal differences; they are structural advantages that make the Quadro M5000M a fundamentally faster GPU for any workload that scales with shader count or memory bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M scores 22,920 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333. The Quadro M5000M is 68% faster.

Q: Does the AMD card have any advantage in the recorded benchmarks?

A: No. The database shows the Quadro M5000M winning both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan tests. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 has zero benchmark wins against the Quadro M5000M.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How do the cards compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a TDP of 65 W, while the Quadro M5000M has a TDP of 100 W. The AMD card is more power-efficient per watt.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3100 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a length of 168 mm. The Quadro M5000M is an MXM module with no power connectors, and its dimensions are listed as portable device dependent.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, which is part of the Radeon Pro Polaris generation. It is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Quadro Maxwell-M generation. It is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die.

The process node difference is significant: 14 nm versus 28 nm, which explains why the AMD card achieves a higher transistor density of 21.4 million per mm² versus 13.1 million per mm² for the NVIDIA card. However, the NVIDIA card has more than double the transistors and nearly four times the die area, which gives it more raw hardware resources. The shading unit count is 512 for the AMD card versus 1,536 for the NVIDIA card, and the texture mapping units are 32 versus 96. The render output units are 16 versus 64.

The Radeon Pro WX 3100 supports FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Quadro M5000M has no recorded FP16 capability. The AMD card also has a higher boost clock at 1,219 MHz versus 1,051 MHz, but the NVIDIA card's base clock is higher at 962 MHz versus 925 MHz. The memory clocks differ as well: 6 Gbps effective for the AMD card versus 5 Gbps effective for the NVIDIA card. These architectural choices reflect different design priorities: AMD focused on efficiency and modern features, while NVIDIA focused on raw throughput and larger memory pools.

Specification Differences

The specifications that differ between the two cards are numerous. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 has a TDP of 65 W, while the Quadro M5000M has a TDP of 100 W. The AMD card is single-slot with a length of 168 mm and a height of 69 mm, while the NVIDIA card is an MXM module with no listed dimensions. The AMD card has display outputs of 1x DisplayPort 1.4a and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the NVIDIA card's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The memory specifications differ significantly: the Radeon Pro WX 3100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the AMD card versus MXM-B (3.0) for the NVIDIA card. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the AMD card, while no value is recorded for the NVIDIA card.

The release dates are also different: the Radeon Pro WX 3100 launched on June 11, 2017, while the Quadro M5000M launched on August 17, 2015. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 199 USD, while the NVIDIA card has no recorded launch MSRP. The production status for both is end-of-life. The AMD card's predecessor is Radeon Pro GCN and its successor is Radeon Pro Vega, while the NVIDIA card's predecessor is Quadro Kepler-M and its successor is Quadro Pascal-M. These differences frame the two cards as products from different eras, with the AMD card being newer and more power-efficient, and the NVIDIA card being older but more powerful in absolute terms.