AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 and the NVIDIA RTX A400 are two professional workstation graphics cards separated by nearly eight years of architectural evolution. The data shows a decisive performance victory for the NVIDIA RTX A400, which wins all nine head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the older AMD card. However, the specification sheets reveal a more nuanced story, with the AMD card relying on a wider memory bus and a higher transistor density per square millimeter, while the NVIDIA card counters with a more modern process node and dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A400 outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 in every single test, with a 100% win rate across all nine comparisons. The most significant margin appears in the Passmark G3D test, where the RTX A400 scores 5,983 against the WX 4100’s 3,699, representing a 38.2% advantage. This is the flagship metric for overall graphics performance, and the gap is substantial.

Compute workloads show an even wider disparity. In the Passmark GPU Compute benchmark, the RTX A400 scores 2,557 versus the WX 4100’s 1,475, a 42.3% lead for NVIDIA. This suggests the Ampere architecture handles parallel compute tasks far more efficiently than the older GCN design. The Geekbench OpenCL test reinforces this trend, with the RTX A400 posting 22,844 points against 17,642 for the AMD card, a 22.8% difference.

The legacy DirectX tests reveal the largest relative gaps. In Passmark DirectX 10, the RTX A400 doubles the WX 4100’s score (32 vs. 16), a 50% delta. DirectX 11 shows a 35.1% advantage (37 vs. 24), while DirectX 9 shows 87 vs. 56, a 35.6% lead for NVIDIA. These older APIs can be sensitive to driver optimization and raw shader throughput, and the data indicates NVIDIA maintains a consistent edge even in these legacy workloads.

The smallest gap appears in DirectX 12, where the RTX A400 scores 27 against the WX 4100’s 22, an 18.5% margin. This is the only test where the AMD card comes within 20% of its rival, suggesting the newer API partially mitigates the architectural gap. The Passmark G2D test, which measures 2D graphics performance, shows the RTX A400 at 899 versus 646 for the WX 4100, a 28.1% advantage. The Geekbench Vulkan test rounds out the suite with the RTX A400 scoring 22,237 against 18,703, a 15.9% lead.

Despite these consistent wins, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The WX 4100 averages 6,330 across all its benchmarks, landing in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A400 averages 6,078, placing it in the 35th percentile. The AMD card actually sits slightly higher in the overall percentile ranking, and its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M350 at 6,327 (a 0.1% delta). The RTX A400’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6,077 (a 0% delta). This indicates that while the RTX A400 wins every head-to-head comparison, its overall benchmark profile places it in a similar performance tier as the older AMD card when viewed against the entire GPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in raw graphics performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 wins all nine head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its largest margin is a 42.3% lead in Passmark GPU Compute (2,557 vs. 1,475), and its smallest is an 18.5% edge in Passmark DirectX 12 (27 vs. 22).

Q: How do the two cards compare in compute workloads?

A: The RTX A400 is significantly ahead in compute. It scores 22,844 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 17,642 for the WX 4100 (22.8% higher), and 2,557 in Passmark GPU Compute versus 1,475 (42.3% higher).

Q: Is the AMD card competitive in any benchmark?

A: No. The RTX A400 wins every single head-to-head test. The closest margin for the AMD card is the 18.5% deficit in Passmark DirectX 12, while the widest deficit is 50% in Passmark DirectX 10.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 has an average benchmark score of 6,330, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 averages 6,078. Despite this, the RTX A400 wins every individual head-to-head test.

Q: How do the cards rank against all other GPUs?

A: The WX 4100 sits in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, slightly ahead of the RTX A400’s 35th percentile. The WX 4100’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M350 (0.1% delta), while the RTX A400’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (0% delta).

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: Both cards have identical memory bandwidth at 96.00 GB/s, but they achieve it differently. The WX 4100 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the RTX A400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divergence between these two cards is profound, reflecting their respective eras. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 is built on the Baffin chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX A400 uses the GA107 chip with Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter.

The NVIDIA card’s higher transistor density is a direct result of the more advanced 8 nm process node. This allows the RTX A400 to feature dedicated hardware that the older AMD card completely lacks: 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. These units enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-accelerated tensor operations, features entirely absent from the GCN 4.0 architecture. The RTX A400 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the WX 4100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support also differs, with the RTX A400 supporting version 1.4 against the WX 4100’s 1.3.

Shader configuration reveals another fundamental difference. The WX 4100 has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The RTX A400 has fewer shading units (768), fewer TMUs (24), but the same 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer shaders and TMUs, the RTX A400 still outperforms the AMD card in every test, thanks to its higher clock speeds and architectural efficiency. The RTX A400 achieves a pixel rate of 28.19 GPixel/s against the WX 4100’s 19.22 GPixel/s, but the AMD card has the higher texture rate at 76.86 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Both cards have identical FP32 and FP16 performance ratios (1:1), but the RTX A400 leads in raw throughput: 2.706 TFLOPS versus 2.460 TFLOPS for the AMD card. The NVIDIA card also has a substantial clock advantage, with a base clock of 1,417 MHz and boost of 1,762 MHz, against the WX 4100’s 1,125 MHz base and 1,201 MHz boost.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node is a clear divider: the AMD card uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA card uses 8 nm at Samsung. Transistor count jumps from 3,000 million (AMD) to 8,700 million (NVIDIA), and die size grows from 123 mm² to 200 mm². Memory type changes from GDDR5 to GDDR6, though both have 4 GB capacity and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The bus width differs substantially: 128-bit for AMD versus 64-bit for NVIDIA.

The WX 4100 has more shading units (1,024 vs. 768) and more TMUs (64 vs. 24), but both have 16 ROPs. The RTX A400 adds 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. Clock speeds favor NVIDIA significantly: base clock 1,417 MHz vs. 1,125 MHz, boost clock 1,762 MHz vs. 1,201 MHz. The RTX A400 has higher FP32 (2.706 TFLOPS vs. 2.460 TFLOPS), higher FP16 (2.706 TFLOPS vs. 2.460 TFLOPS), and higher pixel rate (28.19 GPixel/s vs. 19.22 GPixel/s). The AMD card has the higher texture rate (76.86 GTexel/s vs. 42.29 GTexel/s).

Both cards are single-slot with no power connectors and a 50 W TDP, and both suggest a 250 W power supply. The PCIe interface differs, with the AMD card using PCIe 3.0 x8 and the NVIDIA card using PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are identical: 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions are similar, with the AMD card at 168 mm (6.6 inches) length and the NVIDIA card at 163 mm (6.4 inches), both 69 mm (2.7 inches) high. The WX 4100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Vulkan support is 1.3 for AMD and 1.4 for NVIDIA.

The production status differs fundamentally: the AMD card is end-of-life, released in November 2016 with a launch MSRP of 399 USD, while the NVIDIA card is active, released in April 2024. The AMD card’s predecessor is the Radeon Pro GCN and its successor is the Radeon Pro Vega. The NVIDIA card’s predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A400 is the clear winner across every benchmark category, making a case for use in virtually any modern workload. Its 42.3% lead in Passmark GPU Compute and 22.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL demonstrate superior compute performance, which is critical for scientific simulation, financial modeling, and AI inference. The 15.9% Vulkan lead and 50% DirectX 10 lead indicate strong graphics API support across both modern and legacy applications. The RTX A400’s tensor cores make it the only choice for AI-accelerated workflows, and its ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing for architectural visualization and product design.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100, despite losing every head-to-head test, still holds a few theoretical advantages. Its higher texture rate (76.86 GTexel/s vs. 42.29 GTexel/s) suggests it may handle texture-heavy workloads with more raw throughput, even if real-world tests show otherwise. The wider 128-bit memory bus, coupled with GDDR5, provides the same 96.00 GB/s bandwidth as the NVIDIA card’s narrower 64-bit bus with GDDR6. The AMD card also has more shading units (1,024 vs. 768) and more TMUs (64 vs. 24), which could theoretically benefit certain shader-bound tasks. However, benchmark results indicate these theoretical advantages do not translate into real-world wins.

For users working with DirectX 12 specifically, the gap narrows to 18.5%, making the WX 4100 relatively more competitive in that API. The AMD card also has a slightly higher average benchmark score (6,330 vs. 6,078) and sits in a higher percentile (37th vs. 35th), though this is due to differences in the benchmark suite composition rather than head-to-head superiority. The WX 4100’s end-of-life status means it is no longer in active production, while the RTX A400 remains active with modern driver support and future compatibility. The RTX A400 also supports the newer Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate standards, ensuring longer-term software compatibility.