AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 5600M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5600M is the decisive winner in this comparison, leading the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 in every single benchmark recorded, with margins ranging from 23.1% to a massive 89.9%. The RX 5600M achieves a higher average benchmark score of 46601 against the Pro WX 7100's 40063, and it also ranks higher in the overall GPU percentile at 85 versus 82. While the Pro WX 7100 offers more memory and a workstation-oriented feature set, the data clearly shows that the RX 5600M provides superior raw compute performance across all tested APIs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600M has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 46601, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100's 40063. This represents a performance gap of over 16% in favor of the RX 5600M.

Q: How large is the performance difference in the Geekbench Metal test?

A: The RX 5600M scores 76653 in Geekbench Metal, while the Pro WX 7100 scores 40357. This gives the RX 5600M a 89.9% lead, making it the most lopsided result in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 7100 win any benchmark?

A: No. The data shows the Radeon Pro WX 7100 wins 0 out of 3 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The RX 5600M wins all three, which includes Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan tests.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity between the two cards?

A: The Pro WX 7100 has a larger memory capacity of 8 GB GDDR5, while the RX 5600M has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. However, the RX 5600M has higher memory bandwidth at 288.0 GB/s compared to the Pro WX 7100's 224.0 GB/s.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: No, they are from different generations. The RX 5600M uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm process, while the Pro WX 7100 uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process.

Q: How do their shading unit counts compare?

A: Both GPUs have the exact same number of shading units at 2304. They also have the same number of texture mapping units (TMUs) at 144, but the RX 5600M has double the render output units (ROPs) with 64 versus the Pro WX 7100's 32.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, stemming from a generational leap in design philosophy. The RX 5600M is built on the modern RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the Pro WX 7100 is based on the older GCN 4.0 architecture, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process difference is a primary driver of their performance disparity, as the RX 5600M packs 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 41.0M / mm², whereas the Pro WX 7100 has only 5,700 million transistors on a slightly smaller 232 mm² die with a density of 24.6M / mm².

The two architectures also handle compute workloads very differently. The RX 5600M's RDNA architecture delivers FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, achieving 11.66 TFLOPS FP16 and 5.829 TFLOPS FP32. The Pro WX 7100's GCN architecture operates at a 1:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 and FP32 performance are identical at 5.728 TFLOPS. This indicates that the RX 5600M has a distinct advantage in workloads that can leverage half-precision math.

Another significant architectural difference lies in their feature support and interface capabilities. The RX 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro WX 7100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Furthermore, the RX 5600M utilizes a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, doubling the bandwidth of the Pro WX 7100's PCIe 3.0 x16 connection. The RX 5600M also has double the ROPs (64 vs. 32), which directly contributes to its significantly higher pixel fill rate of 80.96 GPixel/s compared to 39.78 GPixel/s.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M is the clear winner for almost all use cases. Its victories in Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan indicate superior performance across gaming, general compute, and cross-platform graphics APIs. The RX 5600M's higher pixel rate (80.96 GPixel/s) and texture rate (182.2 GTexel/s) also suggest it can handle high-resolution rendering and texture-heavy scenes more efficiently than the Pro WX 7100, which achieves 39.78 GPixel/s and 179.0 GTexel/s respectively.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 does have specific advantages that are not reflected in the raw compute benchmarks. Its primary strength lies in its 8 GB of VRAM, which is 2 GB more than the RX 5600M's 6 GB. For large datasets or textures that exceed 6 GB, the Pro WX 7100 would have a practical edge, despite its lower bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. Additionally, the Pro WX 7100 is a single-slot card with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a more flexible option for multi-display workstation setups. Its lower TDP of 130 W also makes it more power-efficient at the system level than the RX 5600M's 150 W TDP.

Specification Differences

The core specifications reveal a clear split between the two cards. The RX 5600M features a newer and faster memory subsystem with 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro WX 7100 counters with 8 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, but achieves lower bandwidth at 224.0 GB/s. Clock speeds also differ, with the Pro WX 7100 having a higher base clock of 1188 MHz versus the RX 5600M's 1035 MHz, though the RX 5600M has a higher boost clock of 1265 MHz compared to 1243 MHz.

The physical and power profiles are distinct as well. The RX 5600M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no dedicated power connectors and a 150 W TDP, while the Pro WX 7100 is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm in length and 112 mm in height, requiring a single 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The Pro WX 7100 has a launch MSRP of 799 USD. In terms of API support, the RX 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Pro WX 7100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 5600M also uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Pro WX 7100 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are overwhelmingly one-sided, with the RX 5600M winning all three recorded tests. The most dramatic difference is in the Geekbench Metal test, where the RX 5600M scores 76653 against the Pro WX 7100's 40357. This 89.9% delta is the largest performance gap in the comparison, highlighting the RX 5600M's superior graphics compute capabilities in Apple's Metal API.

In the OpenCL test, the RX 5600M again takes a commanding lead with a score of 59589, compared to the Pro WX 7100's 40148. This 48.4% advantage demonstrates that the RX 5600M's compute advantage is not limited to a single API but extends to the widely used OpenCL standard for general-purpose GPU computing. The Vulkan test shows the closest margin, though the RX 5600M still wins decisively with a score of 48843 versus the Pro WX 7100's 39683, a 23.1% difference. This pattern of consistent wins suggests that the RX 5600M has a fundamental performance-per-clock advantage over the older GCN architecture, despite the Pro WX 7100's higher base clock speed.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD Radeon RX 5600M for anyone prioritizing raw performance. With wins in 100% of the head-to-head benchmarks and a higher average benchmark score (46601 vs. 40063), it is the superior choice for gaming, creative applications, and general compute tasks. Its modern RDNA architecture provides a substantial performance uplift, particularly in APIs like Metal and OpenCL, where it leads by 89.9% and 48.4% respectively.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 is only the better choice for a specific, narrow set of requirements. Its 8 GB of VRAM exceeds the RX 5600M's 6 GB, which could be critical for workloads with large memory footprints that fit within that limit. Its single-slot form factor and 4x DisplayPort outputs also make it a more practical workstation card for multi-monitor professional environments. However, for the vast majority of users, the RX 5600M's superior compute performance, higher bandwidth, and better API support make it the clear winner. The Pro WX 7100's only real advantages are its memory capacity and physical design, which do not compensate for its significant performance deficit.