AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 and NVIDIA Quadro K1200 represent two very different generations of professional workstation graphics. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, with the AMD card holding substantial leads in every shared benchmark, but the specifications reveal a more complex story about architecture, memory, and interface differences that buyers should weigh carefully.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison contains only two shared benchmark results, and both decisively favor the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD card scores 24,217 against the Quadro K1200’s 8,831, a delta of 174.2%. This is not a marginal victory; the AMD part delivers nearly three times the raw compute throughput in this test. The gap widens further in Geekbench Vulkan, where the WX 5100 posts 26,909 versus 7,698 for the K1200, an even larger delta of 249.6%. In both cases, the winner is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, and the Quadro K1200 fails to take a single shared benchmark.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite for the AMD card, its strongest absolute scores come from Geekbench Metal at 29,003, followed by Vulkan at 26,909 and OpenCL at 24,217. The PassMark suite shows a different profile: DirectX 9 yields 88, DirectX 11 scores 36, DirectX 10 scores 29, and DirectX 12 scores 26. The PassMark G3D score of 5,496 and GPU Compute score of 2,053 are more indicative of sustained workstation loads. The Quadro K1200, by contrast, has no Metal score and only two recorded benchmarks beyond the shared ones: OpenCL at 8,831 and Vulkan at 7,698.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, both cards sit in similar percentile territory. The WX 5100 holds a 44th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8,863. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R9 M265X at 8,851, a delta of just 0.1%, meaning the two are statistically indistinguishable. The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 ranks at the 43rd percentile with an average score of 8,265, and its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M375X at 8,325, a delta of -0.7%. Interestingly, the K1200’s average score is 598 points lower than the WX 5100’s, but both occupy nearly the same percentile slot—suggesting the field is tightly clustered around these performance levels.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench OpenCL, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins decisively with a score of 24,217 against the NVIDIA Quadro K1200’s 8,831, representing a 174.2% advantage.

Q: Is the Vulkan gap larger or smaller than the OpenCL gap?

A: The Vulkan gap is larger. The WX 5100 scores 26,909 versus 7,698 for the K1200, a delta of 249.6%, compared to the 174.2% delta in OpenCL.

Q: How do the two cards compare in overall benchmark averages?

A: The AMD card has an average benchmark score of 8,863, while the NVIDIA card averages 8,265. The AMD part is roughly 7.2% higher on average.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 sits at the 44th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 sits at the 43rd percentile.

Q: Does the Quadro K1200 have any benchmark where it beats the WX 5100?

A: No. In the two shared head-to-head benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan), the WX 5100 wins both. The data shows zero wins for the Quadro K1200.

Q: What is the closest rival to each card according to the data?

A: For the WX 5100, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X is closest with an average score of 8,851 and a delta of 0.1%. For the K1200, the AMD Radeon R9 M375X is closest at 8,325, a delta of -0.7%.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the superior performer in every measurable shared benchmark. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score (8,863 versus 8,265), and ranks one percentile point higher (44th versus 43rd). The magnitude of the wins—174.2% in OpenCL and 249.6% in Vulkan—is not a subtle edge but a dominant one. Any workload that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration will see dramatically better throughput on the AMD card.

The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 does have one advantage in the specifications: a lower TDP of 45 W versus the WX 5100’s 75 W, and a lower suggested PSU of 200 W versus 250 W. For systems with strict power budgets or smaller power supplies, the K1200 is the more frugal option. However, this power efficiency comes at the cost of compute capability, and the benchmark data shows that the K1200’s performance ceiling is far below the WX 5100’s. For users who prioritize raw performance in professional applications, the AMD card is the clear pick. For those who need minimal power draw and have lighter workloads, the Quadro K1200 remains viable, but it is not competitive on performance.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 uses a 14 nm process node from GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 uses a 28 nm node from TSMC. The transistor counts reflect this: the WX 5100 packs 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, giving a density of 24.6M per mm², whereas the K1200 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die at 12.6M per mm². Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA card on paper: the K1200 has a base clock of 954 MHz and a boost of 1,033 MHz, compared to the WX 5100’s 713 MHz base and 1,086 MHz boost. However, the AMD card’s higher boost clock does not compensate for its massive advantage in shading units (1,792 versus 512) and texture mapping units (112 versus 32).

Memory is another major divergence. The WX 5100 comes with 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The K1200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s—roughly half the bandwidth. The AMD card also has 32 ROPs versus 16 on the NVIDIA card. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: the WX 5100 achieves 34.75 GPixel/s and 121.6 GTexel/s, while the K1200 manages 16.53 GPixel/s and 33.06 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows a similar pattern: the WX 5100 delivers 3.892 TFLOPS in FP32, while the K1200 delivers 1,057.8 GFLOPS. Notably, the AMD card also supports FP16 at 3.892 TFLOPS (1:1), while the NVIDIA card has no FP16 data listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is built on GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, part of the Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x100) generation. The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 uses Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip, listed under the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation—a naming mismatch that reflects the product’s transitional positioning. The process node difference (14 nm versus 28 nm) explains much of the performance and efficiency gap, as does the transistor density (24.6M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm²).

The ROP count is double on the AMD card (32 versus 16), and the texture units are more than triple (112 versus 32). The shading units show the largest proportional difference: 1,792 on the WX 5100 versus 512 on the K1200, a 3.5x ratio. In terms of API support, the AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card also supports DirectX 12, but at the 11_0 feature level, along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The higher Vulkan version on the NVIDIA card does not translate into better Vulkan performance, as the benchmark data shows. The WX 5100’s display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the K1200 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 on the AMD card versus PCIe 2.0 x16 on the NVIDIA card.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins in every benchmark category where both cards have results. In Geekbench OpenCL, it is 174.2% ahead; in Geekbench Vulkan, it is 249.6% ahead. It also wins on raw specification metrics: memory capacity (8 GB versus 4 GB), memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s), FP32 compute (3.892 TFLOPS versus 1,057.8 GFLOPS), and pixel/texture fill rates. The WX 5100 is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads, large datasets that benefit from 8 GB of VRAM, and any application that uses OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration. Its higher TDP of 75 W and suggested PSU of 250 W are modest requirements that most workstation systems can meet.

The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 does not win any benchmark, but it holds advantages in power efficiency and physical size. Its 45 W TDP is 30 W lower than the AMD card, and its suggested PSU is 200 W versus 250 W. The K1200 also has a smaller physical footprint: 160 mm length and 69 mm height, compared to the WX 5100’s 173 mm length and 112 mm height. Both are single-slot cards with no power connectors, but the K1200’s lower power draw makes it more suitable for compact or power-constrained systems. The NVIDIA card also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the AMD card’s Vulkan 1.3, though this does not manifest as a performance advantage in the data. For users who prioritize minimal power consumption, smaller chassis compatibility, or a lower suggested PSU rating, the Quadro K1200 has a niche. For everyone else, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the only rational choice based on the benchmark evidence.