AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M365X Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and the AMD Radeon R7 M365X occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape, despite both carrying the AMD name. The Pro WX 4100 is a professional workstation part built on newer silicon, while the R7 M365X is an older mobile-oriented chip. Their recorded benchmark data shows a stark performance gulf, but the details of where each wins and loses reveal more than just raw speed. This analysis draws exclusively from the database measurements and specification records to lay out what each card offers.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 outperforms the AMD Radeon R7 M365X in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Pro WX 4100 scores 17642 against the R7 M365X’s 5939, a lead of 197.1 percent. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Pro WX 4100 scores 18703 versus 4893, a 282.2 percent advantage. The Pro WX 4100 wins both recorded comparisons, while the R7 M365X wins none.

The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy. The Pro WX 4100 sits at 6330 points across its full benchmark suite, placing it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The R7 M365X averages 5416 points, putting it in the 32nd percentile. The Pro WX 4100’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (6327 average, a 0.1 percent difference), the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282 average, 0.8 percent behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE and GTX 580M (both 6389 average, 0.9 percent ahead). The R7 M365X’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 610M (5444 average, 0.5 percent ahead), the Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370 average, 0.9 percent behind), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467 average, 0.9 percent ahead), and the AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5358 average, 1.1 percent behind).

Who should pick which? The Pro WX 4100 is the clear choice for anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads where compute throughput matters. Its massive leads in both shared benchmark tests indicate it handles general-purpose GPU tasks far more effectively. The R7 M365X, however, has no corresponding advantage in the recorded data. Its only recorded benchmarks are the two Geekbench tests where it loses by wide margins. There is no scenario in the database where the R7 M365X comes out ahead. The Pro WX 4100 is also the only one with a launch MSRP recorded at 399 USD, which the database lists as its official launch price.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 has an average benchmark score of 6330, while the AMD Radeon R7 M365X averages 5416. That puts the Pro WX 4100 in the 37th percentile of all GPUs versus the R7 M365X’s 32nd percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: The Pro WX 4100 scores 17642 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the R7 M365X’s 5939. This represents a 197.1 percent lead for the Pro WX 4100.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The gap is even wider in Vulkan. The Pro WX 4100 scores 18703, while the R7 M365X scores 4893, a 282.2 percent difference in favor of the Pro WX 4100.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Pro WX 4100 has 1024 shading units, while the R7 M365X has 384. The Pro WX 4100 also has 64 texture mapping units versus 24, and 16 render output units versus 8.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but at different feature levels. The Pro WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 M365X supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, and the Pro WX 4100 supports Vulkan 1.3 while the R7 M365X supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card?

A: For the Pro WX 4100, the closest competitors are the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (6327 average, 0.1 percent behind), NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282, 0.8 percent behind), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE and GTX 580M (both 6389, 0.9 percent ahead). For the R7 M365X, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 610M (5444, 0.5 percent ahead), Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370, 0.9 percent behind), NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467, 0.9 percent ahead), and AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5358, 1.1 percent behind).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is built on GCN 4.0 architecture with the codename Baffin chip. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Polaris generation, specifically the WX x100 line. The AMD Radeon R7 M365X uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Litho chip, part of the Gem System generation under the R7 M300 series.

The manufacturing process separates them further. The Pro WX 4100 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the R7 M365X uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. This process difference directly impacts transistor density. The Pro WX 4100 packs 3,000 million transistors into a die size of 123 mm², yielding a density of 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The R7 M365X has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The Pro WX 4100 fits more than three times the transistors into a die that is only about 60 percent larger.

Feature support also differs. The Pro WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 M365X is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Both offer OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan support versions differ: the Pro WX 4100 lists Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 M365X lists Vulkan 1.2.170. The Pro WX 4100 records a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio at 2.460 TFLOPS each, while the R7 M365X has no FP16 figure recorded in the database. The Pro WX 4100 also has a defined power envelope at 50 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the R7 M365X has no TDP, power connector, or PSU recommendation listed.

The Pro WX 4100 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, measuring 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. It outputs video through four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. The R7 M365X has no recorded dimensions, slot width, or display outputs in the database, which is consistent with a mobile or embedded part that may be soldered down.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear divergences across nearly every field. The most obvious is memory. The Pro WX 4100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M365X has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but only 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clocks also differ: the Pro WX 4100 runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the R7 M365X runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The Pro WX 4100 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The R7 M365X has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel and texture rates follow: the Pro WX 4100 outputs 19.22 GPixel/s and 76.86 GTexel/s, while the R7 M365X manages 6.600 GPixel/s and 19.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.460 TFLOPS for the Pro WX 4100 versus 633.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M365X, a difference of roughly four times.

Clock speeds are only partially recorded. The Pro WX 4100 has a base clock of 1125 MHz and a boost clock of 1201 MHz. The R7 M365X has no base or boost clock listed in the database. Both use PCIe 3.0 x8 as their bus interface. The production status for both is end-of-life. The Pro WX 4100 was released in November 2016, while the R7 M365X came out in May 2015. The Pro WX 4100’s predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro GCN and its successor as Radeon Pro Vega. The R7 M365X’s predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The Pro WX 4100 carries a launch MSRP of 399 USD, while the R7 M365X has no MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database includes two direct comparisons between these GPUs, both in Geekbench tests. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Pro WX 4100 scores 17642 and the R7 M365X scores 5939. The delta is 197.1 percent in favor of the Pro WX 4100. This means the Pro WX 4100 nearly triples the R7 M365X’s OpenCL output. The second test is Geekbench Vulkan, where the Pro WX 4100 scores 18703 and the R7 M365X scores 4893. The delta is 282.2 percent, meaning the Pro WX 4100 is almost four times faster in this workload.

These results align with the underlying hardware differences. The Pro WX 4100 has 1024 shading units versus 384, and its FP32 throughput is 2.460 TFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS. The memory bandwidth advantage, 96.00 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s, also plays a role. The newer GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process likely contributes to the efficiency of these gains, though the database does not break down benchmark scores by architecture alone.

The wider benchmark suite for the Pro WX 4100 shows additional context. It scores 21018 in Geekbench Metal, 3699 in Passmark G3D, 1475 in Passmark GPU Compute, and lower scores in older DirectX tests: 16 in Passmark DirectX 10, 24 in DirectX 11, 22 in DirectX 12, and 56 in DirectX 9. It also records 646 in Passmark G2D. The R7 M365X has no entries for these tests, so no comparison is possible there. The Pro WX 4100’s average benchmark score of 6330 comes from all ten of its recorded tests, while the R7 M365X’s average of 5416 comes from only two tests, both Geekbench.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro WX 4100 wins in every recorded category. Its two head-to-head victories are in OpenCL and Vulkan, which are compute-oriented APIs. The Pro WX 4100’s 197.1 percent OpenCL lead and 282.2 percent Vulkan lead suggest it is particularly strong in general-purpose GPU compute tasks such as rendering, simulation, or data processing. Its higher FP32 throughput, 2.460 TFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS, supports this. The card also has a larger memory pool at 4 GB, which benefits workloads that need to hold larger datasets locally.

The R7 M365X does not win any recorded benchmark. However, its profile suggests it is not designed for the same tasks. It has 1 GB of memory, which is sufficient for lighter graphical duties but limiting for compute. Its 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for basic frame buffer work but not for heavy data movement. The absence of a TDP, power connectors, and display outputs in the database implies it is a mobile part, likely intended for laptops where power efficiency and size matter more than peak performance.

For use-case planning, the Pro WX 4100 fits professional workstation scenarios: multiple mini-DisplayPort outputs, single-slot cooling, 50 W power draw, and a 250 W suggested PSU make it suitable for compact or multi-GPU systems. The R7 M365X, with no recorded power or physical specifications, appears aimed at integrated mobile graphics roles where the Pro WX 4100’s form factor would not apply. The database does not record any benchmark where the R7 M365X comes out ahead, so any decision between these two cards should default to the Pro WX 4100 unless the physical or power constraints of the R7 M365X’s unknown mobile context apply. The data shows a clear winner in raw performance, but the R7 M365X may still serve a niche where its smaller memory footprint and older architecture are acceptable trade-offs for a lower-profile implementation.