AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two common benchmark tests for these GPUs, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 dominates both. In Geekbench Metal, the AMD card scores 29,003 against the GTX 880M's 10,458, a 177.3% advantage. That is not a marginal gap; it is a complete generational leap in compute throughput. The OpenCL result is even more lopsided: 24,217 versus 5,622, a 330.8% delta. The GTX 880M is not competitive in either workload that both cards share.

These two tests are compute-centric, which matters. Metal and OpenCL exercise general-purpose GPU compute, not rasterization. The AMD card's 3.892 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, combined with its 1:1 FP16 ratio, explains why it runs away in these APIs. The GTX 880M's 3.050 TFLOPS is lower, and it lacks a comparable FP16 path. The data indicates that for any compute-heavy task using these APIs, the WX 5100 is the only sensible choice.

The average benchmark scores across all recorded tests reinforce the head-to-head results. The AMD card averages 8,863 points, while the NVIDIA card averages 8,040. That is a 10.2% overall advantage, but the gap is heavily concentrated in the two shared tests. The GTX 880M's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8,039, 0% delta) and the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8,053, -0.2%), sit within a rounding error of its average. Meanwhile, the WX 5100's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8,851, 0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon 550X (8,918, -0.6%), placing it in a slightly higher performance tier. The percentile rankings show the WX 5100 at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, versus the GTX 880M at the 42nd percentile. Both are mid-pack cards, but the AMD part is consistently ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 uses the Ellesmere chip based on GCN 4.0, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M uses the GK104 chip based on Kepler, fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm node. It contains 3,540 million transistors on a larger 294 mm² die, with a density of just 12.0 million per square millimeter. The process node difference explains the density gap: 14 nm versus 28 nm is a full node shrink, allowing AMD to fit nearly double the transistors per area.

Shader configuration also differs significantly. The WX 5100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 880M has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. AMD's card has more shaders but fewer TMUs. The texture rate favors NVIDIA: 127.1 GTexel/s versus 121.6 GTexel/s. The pixel rate favors AMD: 34.75 GPixel/s versus 31.78 GPixel/s. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores; both rely on traditional rasterization and compute pipelines.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The GTX 880M runs at a 954 MHz base clock and 993 MHz boost, while the WX 5100 uses a 713 MHz base and 1,086 MHz boost. The AMD card's boost clock is 93 MHz higher, but its base clock is 241 MHz lower. The NVIDIA card relies on a higher sustained base clock, while AMD depends on aggressive boosting to reach its peak. Memory configurations are identical in capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth: 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus delivering 160.0 GB/s. Both run memory at 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective data rate. The API support differs: the WX 5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 880M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), meaning the AMD card has feature level 12_0 versus NVIDIA's 11_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: AMD lists Vulkan 1.3, NVIDIA lists 1.2.175.

Power and form factor are starkly different. The WX 5100 has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and needs only a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX 880M has a 122 W TDP, uses an MXM Module form factor, also requires no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed. The AMD card is a desktop workstation part with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The NVIDIA card is a mobile module with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." The GTX 880M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the WX 5100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The WX 5100 wins decisively in compute-bound workloads. Its Geekbench Metal score is 177.3% higher, and its OpenCL score is 330.8% higher. The FP32 throughput of 3.892 TFLOPS versus 3.050 TFLOPS gives it a 27.6% raw compute advantage. The 1:1 FP16 support means it can double its throughput in half-precision workloads, a feature the GTX 880M lacks entirely. For tasks like machine learning inference, scientific simulation, or any OpenCL/Metal compute pipeline, the AMD card is categorically superior.

The GTX 880M has no recorded wins in the shared benchmarks, but its architecture still holds specific advantages. Its texture rate of 127.1 GTexel/s is 4.5% higher than the AMD card's 121.6 GTexel/s. In texture-heavy rasterization workloads, such as certain game scenes or procedural texture generation, the NVIDIA card could theoretically perform closer to parity. Its higher base clock of 954 MHz versus 713 MHz means it delivers consistent performance without relying on boost behavior. The MXM form factor also gives it a niche: it is designed for mobile workstations and gaming laptops, where the WX 5100's desktop PCIe card cannot fit.

The percentile data suggests both cards are mid-range performers. The WX 5100 sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, the GTX 880M at the 42nd. The AMD card's average score of 8,863 places it among rivals like the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8,851) and the AMD Radeon 550X (8,918). The NVIDIA card's average of 8,040 places it alongside the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8,039) and the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8,053). The WX 5100 competes with slightly newer or higher-tier mobile parts, while the GTX 880M sits alongside older desktop cards.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 delivers 3.892 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M delivers 3.050 TFLOPS, a 27.6% advantage for AMD.

Q: Do both cards support the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both have 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth and 5 Gbps effective memory speed.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The WX 5100 has a 75 W TDP, while the GTX 880M has a 122 W TDP. The AMD card consumes 47 W less under load.

Q: Which GPU has better API support for DirectX?

A: The WX 5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 880M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The AMD card has a higher feature level.

Q: How do the two compare in Vulkan support?

A: The WX 5100 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the GTX 880M supports Vulkan 1.2.175. AMD lists a newer version.

Q: What is the Geekbench Metal score difference?

A: The WX 5100 scores 29,003, and the GTX 880M scores 10,458, a 177.3% advantage for AMD.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every architectural field. The WX 5100 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, achieving 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The GTX 880M uses a 28 nm process at TSMC with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, achieving 12.0 million per square millimeter. The AMD card has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs.

Clock speeds differ: the WX 5100 runs at 713 MHz base and 1,086 MHz boost; the GTX 880M runs at 954 MHz base and 993 MHz boost. Pixel rates are 34.75 GPixel/s versus 31.78 GPixel/s, favoring AMD. Texture rates are 121.6 GTexel/s versus 127.1 GTexel/s, favoring NVIDIA. FP32 throughput is 3.892 TFLOPS versus 3.050 TFLOPS, favoring AMD. The WX 5100 supports FP16 at 3.892 TFLOPS (1:1); the GTX 880M lists no FP16 capability.

Power and form factor differ substantially: 75 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors, 250 W suggested PSU, PCIe 3.0 x16, and four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs for the AMD card. The NVIDIA card has a 122 W TDP, MXM Module slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The AMD card measures 173 mm (6.8 inches) in length and 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height; the NVIDIA card has no recorded dimensions. Release dates differ: the WX 5100 launched on 2016-11-17, the GTX 880M on 2014-03-11. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 499 USD; the NVIDIA card has no recorded MSRP.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the superior GPU in every shared benchmark and most architectural metrics. Its 177.3% Metal advantage and 330.8% OpenCL advantage are not close calls. The FP32 throughput is 27.6% higher, the pixel rate is 9.3% higher, and it supports newer API versions across DirectX, Vulkan, and FP16 compute. The 75 W TDP makes it dramatically more power-efficient than the GTX 880M's 122 W. For any workstation use case involving compute, the WX 5100 is the only rational choice.

The GTX 880M retains a narrow niche. Its higher texture rate (127.1 versus 121.6 GTexel/s) and higher base clock (954 versus 713 MHz) suggest it could hold its own in texture-bound rasterization scenarios. Its MXM form factor is designed for mobile systems, so it remains an option for laptop upgrades or custom mobile workstations where the desktop-only WX 5100 cannot be installed. However, the benchmark data shows no scenario where the GTX 880M wins outright.

Users should choose the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 for desktop workstation builds, compute workloads, or any task using Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M is only appropriate for legacy mobile systems requiring an MXM module, where its lower compute performance and older architecture are acceptable trade-offs for the form factor. The recorded data offers no reason to prefer the GTX 880M on performance grounds alone.