AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs AMD Radeon R7 350 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 350 and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 are both end-of-life graphics cards from AMD, but they target very different segments of the market. The R7 350 is a mainstream consumer part from the Pirate Islands generation, while the Pro WX 4100 is a professional workstation card from the Radeon Pro Polaris lineup. The database shows a clear performance hierarchy between the two, driven by fundamental architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unequivocal in favor of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100. In the two head-to-head tests recorded in the database, the professional card wins decisively. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Pro WX 4100 scores 17,642, a massive 55.8% lead over the R7 350's score of 7,792. This is not a marginal victory; the Pro WX 4100 more than doubles the compute output of the R7 350 in this synthetic workload.

The gap widens further in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The Pro WX 4100 achieves a score of 18,703, which is 62.3% ahead of the R7 350's 7,057. This indicates that the architectural advantages of the Pro WX 4100 are particularly pronounced when leveraging modern graphics APIs for compute tasks. The data shows a 2-0 win tally for the Pro WX 4100 in these direct comparisons.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the picture is slightly more nuanced but still favors the professional card. The Pro WX 4100 has an average benchmark score of 6,330, while the R7 350 posts a higher average of 7,425. This discrepancy is explained by the different sets of tests run on each card. The R7 350's average is based on only its OpenCL and Vulkan scores, whereas the Pro WX 4100's average includes a wider range of tests, including older DirectX 9, 10, and 11 workloads where its performance is relatively lower.

The Pro WX 4100's individual scores highlight its strengths. It achieves 21,018 in Geekbench Metal, 17,642 in OpenCL, and 18,703 in Vulkan. Its Passmark scores tell a different story: 16 in DirectX 10, 24 in DirectX 11, 22 in DirectX 12, and 56 in DirectX 9. These lower legacy scores drag down its average, but the modern API compute scores are where the card excels. The R7 350, by contrast, has no recorded Metal, Passmark, or DirectX-specific scores in the database, limiting direct comparison to the OpenCL and Vulkan tests.

Architecture Differences

The core architectural gap between these two cards is vast. The R7 350 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Cape Verde chip, and is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Pro WX 4100, in contrast, uses the newer GCN 4.0 architecture with the Baffin chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process shrink allows for a significant increase in transistor count: the Pro WX 4100 packs 3,000 million transistors into a die size of 123 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The R7 350 has 1,500 million transistors in the same die area, giving it a density of just 12.2M per mm².

This architectural leap translates into a doubling of raw compute resources. The Pro WX 4100 features 1,024 shading units and 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), while the R7 350 is equipped with 512 shading units and 32 TMUs. Both cards have 16 raster operation units (ROPs). The clock speeds also differ, with the Pro WX 4100 running at a base clock of 1125 MHz and a boost clock of 1201 MHz, while the R7 350's clock speeds are not specified in the database for its core, only its memory clock.

The memory subsystems are also distinct. The Pro WX 4100 comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. The R7 350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but its bandwidth is lower at 72.00 GB/s. The Pro WX 4100's memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the R7 350's memory runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). These differences in capacity and bandwidth are critical for professional workloads that handle large datasets.

The feature sets also reflect their different generations. The Pro WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 350 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Pro WX 4100 also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, delivering 2.460 TFLOPS for both, whereas the R7 350 only lists FP32 performance of 819.2 GFLOPS. The pixel rate for the Pro WX 4100 is 19.22 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 76.86 GTexel/s, compared to the R7 350's 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is the clear winner for any modern, compute-intensive workload. Its 55.8% lead in OpenCL and 62.3% lead in Vulkan demonstrate that it is vastly superior for tasks that leverage general-purpose GPU computing, such as rendering, simulation, and data processing. Its 4 GB of VRAM and higher memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s also make it more suitable for handling larger textures and datasets. The card's support for Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) ensures compatibility with the latest graphics APIs.

The R7 350's strengths, based on the recorded data, are more limited. Its higher average benchmark score of 7,425 is an artifact of the limited test suite applied to it. In the only direct comparisons available, it loses by a wide margin. However, its lower power draw and simpler feature set might make it a more straightforward option for basic display output or legacy applications. The R7 350's 2 GB of memory is sufficient for older games or non-demanding 2D workloads, and its single-slot design with DVI, HDMI 1.4a, and DisplayPort 1.2 outputs offers basic connectivity.

For professional users, the Pro WX 4100 is the only choice between the two. Its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor setups, a common requirement in workstation environments. The R7 350, with its single DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort outputs, is less flexible for such configurations. The Pro WX 4100 also offers a higher FP32 throughput of 2.460 TFLOPS, which is 3 times the R7 350's 819.2 GFLOPS, making it substantially faster for scientific and engineering calculations.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 in OpenCL compared to the R7 350?

A: The Pro WX 4100 scores 17,642 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 55.8% higher than the R7 350's score of 7,792.

Q: What is the difference in Vulkan performance between the two cards?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Pro WX 4100 achieves 18,703, a 62.3% lead over the R7 350's 7,057.

Q: Which card has more VRAM and memory bandwidth?

A: The Pro WX 4100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s, while the R7 350 has 2 GB with a bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two GPUs?

A: The R7 350 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, while the Pro WX 4100 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process. The Pro WX 4100 has double the shading units (1,024 vs 512) and TMUs (64 vs 32).

Q: Does the Pro WX 4100 support newer graphics APIs than the R7 350?

A: Yes, the Pro WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 350 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The R7 350 has an average score of 7,425, while the Pro WX 4100 has an average of 6,330. This is because the Pro WX 4100's average includes its lower scores in legacy DirectX tests, while the R7 350 only has OpenCL and Vulkan scores recorded.

The Verdict

The data unambiguously favors the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 for any task involving modern compute or graphics workloads. Its 2-0 record in direct head-to-head benchmarks, with leads of 55.8% and 62.3%, respectively, establishes it as the superior performer. The doubling of shading units, TMUs, and FP32 throughput, combined with double the VRAM and higher memory bandwidth, makes it a far more capable card for professional applications.

The R7 350, while having a higher average benchmark score in the database, does not hold up in direct comparisons. Its performance is limited by its older GCN 1.0 architecture, lower clock speeds, and smaller memory pool. It is suitable only for basic display tasks or legacy software where its limited feature set is not a bottleneck.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice is clear. The Pro WX 4100 is the appropriate pick for anyone needing reliable performance in modern APIs, multi-monitor setups, or compute-heavy workloads. Its launch MSRP was 399 USD, reflecting its professional positioning. The R7 350, on the other hand, is a legacy part with no advantage in any recorded benchmark. The Pro WX 4100 is the only rational choice from a performance standpoint, despite its lower average score, which is skewed by legacy test results.