AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and NVIDIA Quadro K5100M are both end-of-life professional mobile graphics solutions, but they target very different system classes and design philosophies. The data shows a clear split: the Quadro K5100M edges out the WX 3200 in raw OpenCL compute performance, while the WX 3200 offers a modern feature set, a vastly more efficient process node, and a compact single-slot desktop form factor. The benchmark results indicate that neither card is a dominant winner; instead, the choice hinges on whether you prioritize raw throughput in legacy workloads or architectural efficiency and contemporary API support.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 if you need a modern, low-profile workstation card for a desktop chassis with strict power and space limits. Its 65W TDP and single-slot design, combined with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, make it ideal for multi-display setups in compact systems. The data shows it supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, ensuring compatibility with current software stacks. Its 50th percentile ranking places it squarely in the mid-range of all GPUs, and its closest rival is the AMD FirePro W4300 with a score of 11225, a delta of 0%. This means the WX 3200 is essentially performance-equivalent to that older workstation card, but with a smaller die and newer architecture.

Pick the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M if you are working with legacy mobile workstations or need more video memory for large datasets. The K5100M offers 8 GB of GDDR5, double the WX 3200’s 4 GB, and a wider 256-bit memory bus that delivers 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. While its 28nm process and 100W TDP are outdated, its OpenCL score of 11771 is 4.6% higher than the WX 3200’s 11228. The K5100M also has a higher transistor count (3,540 million vs 2,200 million) and more shading units (1536 vs 640), which explains its compute advantage. However, its Vulkan support is older (1.2.175) and it lacks the WX 3200’s modern 14nm process efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split is architectural. The WX 3200 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14nm process from GlobalFoundries, packing 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 21.4M / mm². In contrast, the K5100M uses the older Kepler architecture on a 28nm process from TSMC, with 3,540 million transistors spread across a much larger 294 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 12.0M / mm².

The compute resources differ sharply. The WX 3200 has 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the K5100M has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This explains why the K5100M’s texture rate (98.69 GTexel/s) is more than double the WX 3200’s (41.44 GTexel/s). However, the WX 3200 supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (1.658 TFLOPS for both), whereas the K5100M has no listed FP16 capability. The K5100M does lead in FP32, hitting 2.369 TFLOPS versus the WX 3200’s 1.658 TFLOPS.

Feature-wise, the WX 3200 supports newer APIs: DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the K5100M’s DirectX 12 (11_0), and Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The memory clocks also differ: the WX 3200 runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the K5100M runs at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective), but the K5100M’s wider 256-bit bus compensates with higher total bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M wins the only head-to-head benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 11771 versus the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200’s 11228, a 4.6% lead for the K5100M.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200. Its TDP is 65W, and its 14nm process node is significantly smaller than the K5100M’s 28nm node. The WX 3200 also requires a 250W suggested PSU, while the K5100M has no listed PSU requirement due to its MXM module form factor.

Q: Can I use these cards in a desktop tower?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a single-slot, 167mm card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs, designed for desktop use. The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M is an MXM Module (MXM-B 3.0), which is typically used in laptops or proprietary mobile workstations, and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M has a 256-bit memory bus and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a 128-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, giving the K5100M a 19.2 GB/s advantage.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The WX 3200’s nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4300 with a score of 11225 (0% delta). The K5100M’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M375 with a score of 10070 (-0.3% delta). Notably, the WX 3200 is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q in OpenCL, while the K5100M is 2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 6000.

Q: Which card is newer?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 was released on 2019-07-01, while the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M was released on 2013-07-22. The WX 3200 is roughly six years newer.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | NVIDIA Quadro K5100M |

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

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 771 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 771 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 32 | 128 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| FP32 Performance | 1.658 TFLOPS | 2.369 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1.658 TFLOPS (1:1) | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 20.72 GPixel/s | 24.67 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 41.44 GTexel/s | 98.69 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 65 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.175 |

| Dimensions (Length) | 167 mm (6.6 inches) | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2019-07-01 | 2013-07-22 |

| Launch MSRP | 199 USD | Not listed |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL. The results show the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M scoring 11771 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200’s 11228. This represents a 4.6% advantage for the K5100M, which is a modest but consistent lead. This margin aligns with the K5100M’s higher FP32 throughput (2.369 TFLOPS versus 1.658 TFLOPS) and its larger memory subsystem (115.2 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s).

However, looking at the broader benchmark context reveals nuance. The WX 3200’s average benchmark score of 11228 gives it a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The K5100M’s average benchmark score is 10043, which is lower than its OpenCL score because it also includes a Geekbench Metal score of 8315. The WX 3200 has no Metal benchmark listed. This means that while the K5100M wins in OpenCL, its overall average is dragged down by the Metal result, placing it at the 48th percentile.

In terms of closest rivals, the WX 3200 is effectively tied with the AMD FirePro W4300 (11225, 0% delta) and is 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q (11088). The K5100M is 0.3% slower than the AMD Radeon R9 M375 (10070) but 0.8% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M (9959) and 2% faster than the NVIDIA Quadro 6000 (9846). This shows that the K5100M’s OpenCL score is its strong suit, while its Metal performance is comparatively weak.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins on efficiency and modern features. The 14nm process node and 65W TDP make it a clear choice for systems where heat and power draw are critical constraints. Its modern API support (DirectX 12_0, Vulkan 1.3) ensures compatibility with current software, and its four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs allow for flexible multi-monitor setups. The single-slot, 167mm length fits in small form factor cases. The data also shows it holds its own against much newer hardware; being 1.3% ahead of the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q in OpenCL is a notable result for a 2019 budget card. Its 50th percentile ranking indicates it is a balanced mid-range performer.

NVIDIA Quadro K5100M wins on raw compute and memory capacity. The 8 GB of VRAM is double the WX 3200’s allocation, which is critical for large textures or datasets that exceed 4 GB. The 256-bit memory bus provides 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and the 1536 shading units deliver a 4.6% higher OpenCL score. The K5100M’s 98.69 GTexel/s texture rate is more than double that of the WX 3200, making it better suited for texture-heavy workloads. Its 2.369 TFLOPS FP32 performance is also superior. However, this power comes at a cost: a 100W TDP and a form factor that is tied to mobile workstation chassis. The K5100M’s 48th percentile overall ranking reflects its mixed benchmark results, where its OpenCL strength is offset by a weak Metal score.

In practical terms, the WX 3200 is the better choice for a new, compact desktop workstation that needs to run modern applications efficiently. The K5100M is the better choice if you are upgrading an older mobile workstation and need maximum compute throughput and memory headroom, accepting its older architecture and higher power draw.