AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs AMD Radeon RX 6400 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and the AMD Radeon RX 6400 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, with the former built for professional workstations on GCN 4.0 and the latter a modern consumer-oriented part on RDNA 2.0. The benchmark data reveals a clear generational divide, with the RX 6400 winning eight of nine head-to-head tests, although the WX 4100 claims a notable victory in one API-specific workload. This analysis examines the performance deltas, architectural underpinnings, and use-case implications based solely on the provided data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the AMD Radeon RX 6400 comes in the Passmark G3D test, where it scores 7673 against the WX 4100’s 3699. This 51.8% delta represents the largest single performance gap between the two cards and underscores the RX 6400’s substantial advantage in overall 3D rendering throughput. The RX 6400 also dominates in compute-oriented workloads, posting a Passmark GPU Compute score of 2812 versus 1475, a 47.5% margin that highlights its superior raw arithmetic capability.

In the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, the RX 6400’s lead expands further, scoring 32011 compared to the WX 4100’s 17642, a 44.9% difference. This result is consistent with the RX 6400’s higher FP32 throughput of 3.565 TFLOPS against the WX 4100’s 2.460 TFLOPS. The DirectX API tests follow a similar pattern, with the RX 6400 winning by 70.4% in DirectX 10 (54 vs 16) and 65.7% in DirectX 11 (70 vs 24). Even in DirectX 12, where the WX 4100’s GCN architecture might be expected to fare better, the RX 6400 still leads 30 to 22, a 26.7% advantage.

The RX 6400 also wins the legacy DirectX 9 test by 39.8% (93 vs 56) and the 2D graphics test by 10.5% (722 vs 646). However, the WX 4100 scores a significant upset in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark, achieving 18703 against the RX 6400’s 16372. This 14.2% victory for the older card suggests that its GCN 4.0 architecture handles the Vulkan API more efficiently in this specific workload, despite the RX 6400’s overall hardware superiority. The final scoreboard shows the RX 6400 with eight wins and the WX 4100 with one, though the Vulkan result prevents a complete sweep and indicates that API-level optimization can still favor the older design.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The WX 4100 uses the Baffin chip based on GCN 4.0, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the RX 6400 employs the Navi 24 chip on RDNA 2.0, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink contributes to a dramatic difference in transistor density: the RX 6400 packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding 50.5 million transistors per square millimeter, whereas the WX 4100 houses 3,000 million transistors on a larger 123 mm² die, achieving only 24.4 million per square millimeter.

Clock speeds also diverge sharply. The WX 4100 operates at a base of 1125 MHz and a boost of 1201 MHz, while the RX 6400 runs at 1923 MHz base and 2321 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2039 MHz. This nearly 93% higher boost clock on the RX 6400 directly contributes to its performance lead. Memory configurations differ as well: the WX 4100 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus delivering 96.00 GB/s, whereas the RX 6400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus but achieves 128.0 GB/s due to a higher 16 Gbps effective memory speed. Despite half the bus width, the RX 6400’s memory bandwidth is 33% higher.

The compute unit layouts also reflect architectural philosophy changes. The WX 4100 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the RX 6400 has fewer shading units at 768, fewer TMUs at 48, but double the ROPs at 32. The RX 6400 also introduces 12 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the WX 4100. Consequently, the pixel rate jumps from 19.22 GPixel/s on the WX 4100 to 74.27 GPixel/s on the RX 6400, and texture rate rises from 76.86 GTexel/s to 111.4 GTexel/s. FP16 performance shows an even larger divergence, with the RX 6400 delivering 7.130 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio versus the WX 4100’s 1:1 2.460 TFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the clear choice for any workload prioritizing raw 3D rendering, compute throughput, or modern API support. Its wins in DirectX 10, 11, and 12, along with OpenCL, make it suitable for gaming, general-purpose GPU compute, and applications leveraging current graphics APIs. The RX 6400’s 51.8% lead in Passmark G3D and 47.5% lead in GPU compute position it as the performance leader for most tasks, while its 12 ray tracing cores offer hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects, a capability the WX 4100 lacks entirely.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100, despite its age, claims a decisive win in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark. With a 14.2% advantage, it demonstrates superior Vulkan performance in that specific test, which could translate to an edge in Vulkan-based applications or games that are optimized for GCN’s command processor. The WX 4100 also holds a theoretical advantage in PCIe bandwidth utilization, as its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface provides more lanes than the RX 6400’s PCIe 4.0 x4, though the RX 6400’s newer bus standard offers higher per-lane throughput. For professional users relying on legacy Vulkan titles or specific workstation software that favors GCN, the WX 4100’s single benchmark victory may be meaningful, but the overall data strongly favors the RX 6400 for general use.

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 RX 6400 averages 6001. However, the RX 6400 wins eight of nine head-to-head tests, indicating its average is dragged down by lower scores in specific APIs like Vulkan.

Q: How does the RX 6400’s memory bandwidth compare to the WX 4100’s?

A: The RX 6400 delivers 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth using GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the WX 4100 provides 96.00 GB/s via GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The RX 6400’s higher effective memory speed of 16 Gbps compensates for its narrower bus.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 performance between the two cards?

A: The RX 6400 achieves 3.565 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, which is 45% higher than the WX 4100’s 2.460 TFLOPS. This aligns with the RX 6400’s substantial leads in OpenCL and compute benchmarks.

Q: Does the WX 4100 support ray tracing?

A: No, the WX 4100 has no ray tracing cores, while the RX 6400 includes 12. This makes the RX 6400 the only option for hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 6400 boosts to 2321 MHz, compared to the WX 4100’s 1201 MHz. This nearly 93% higher boost clock is a primary factor in the RX 6400’s performance dominance.

Q: What are the DirectX feature level differences?

A: The WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The RX 6400’s newer feature level enables advanced rendering techniques that the WX 4100 cannot handle.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 | AMD Radeon RX 6400 |

|:---------------|:------------------------|:--------------------|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1125 MHz | 1923 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1201 MHz | 2321 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 2039 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz / 6 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz / 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 768 |

| TMUs | 64 | 48 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | N/A | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 19.22 GPixel/s | 74.27 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 76.86 GTexel/s | 111.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.460 TFLOPS | 3.565 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 2.460 TFLOPS (1:1) | 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 53 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2016-11-09 | 2022-01-18 |

| Launch MSRP | 399 USD | 159 USD |