AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 7700S Comparison

# AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs AMD Radeon RX 7700S

The recorded data splits these two AMD graphics solutions into distinct roles. The Radeon Pro WX 7100, a desktop workstation card from 2016, and the Radeon RX 7700S, a 2023 mobile gaming GPU, each claim one head-to-head benchmark victory. The Pro WX 7100 wins in Vulkan by 9.1%, while the RX 7700S dominates OpenCL by 36.3%. Their average benchmark scores tell a more complex story: the Pro WX 7100 sits at 40,063 points, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7700S averages 33,849 points, landing in the 78th percentile. Despite the RX 7700S winning the largest single benchmark margin, the older workstation card holds a higher overall standing in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the two direct comparisons. The Radeon RX 7700S wins decisively in OpenCL compute workloads, scoring 62,983 versus 40,148, a 36.3% advantage. This points toward applications that leverage general-purpose GPU compute, such as rendering, scientific simulation, or machine learning inference. The Radeon Pro WX 7100, by contrast, takes the Vulkan graphics test with 39,683 points against 36,380, a 9.1% lead. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API used in modern games and professional visualization tools, so the workstation card holds an edge in that specific rendering path.

Beyond the direct head-to-head, the benchmark database shows the Pro WX 7100 also performs strongly in Geekbench Metal, scoring 40,357, which is actually its highest individual result. The RX 7700S lacks a Metal score in the records, so its cross-platform story is incomplete. The RX 7700S does have a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2,185, which the Pro WX 7100 does not have, indicating the newer card is built for DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute, the RX 7700S is the clear choice. For Vulkan-based rendering or Metal environments, the Pro WX 7100 holds the advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design generations. The Pro WX 7100 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The RX 7700S uses Navi 33 with RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The process node difference is substantial: 14 nm versus 6 nm, which directly impacts transistor density. The Pro WX 7100 packs 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, yielding 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 7700S crams 13,300 million transistors into a smaller 204 mm² die, achieving 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. That is a 2.65x density advantage for the newer chip.

The compute resources also differ in configuration. The Pro WX 7100 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 7700S has fewer shading units at 2,048, fewer TMUs at 128, but doubles the ROPs to 64. The RX 7700S also includes 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pro WX 7100, which has no RT cores listed. This reflects the RDNA 3.0 architecture's focus on modern rendering features like hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Pro WX 7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7700S also has 8 GB, but uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 288.0 GB/s. Despite half the bus width, the newer memory type provides 28.6% more bandwidth. The RX 7700S also supports higher effective memory speed at 18 Gbps versus 7 Gbps for the older card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL result is the largest divergence in the entire comparison. The RX 7700S scores 62,983, which is 36.3% higher than the Pro WX 7100's 40,148. This margin is substantial, indicating the RDNA 3.0 architecture delivers far superior raw compute throughput in OpenCL. The FP32 numbers support this: the RX 7700S is rated at 20.48 TFLOPS, while the Pro WX 7100 manages only 5.728 TFLOPS. That is a 3.6x theoretical advantage, though the real-world OpenCL gap is smaller at 1.6x.

In Vulkan, the situation reverses. The Pro WX 7100 scores 39,683, beating the RX 7700S's 36,380 by 9.1%. This is a moderate but meaningful lead. Interestingly, the RX 7700S's Vulkan score is actually lower than its OpenCL score by a wide margin (36,380 versus 62,983), while the Pro WX 7100's Vulkan and OpenCL scores are nearly identical (39,683 versus 40,148). This suggests the older GCN architecture handles both APIs with similar efficiency, while the newer RDNA 3.0 chip is heavily optimized for compute but lags in Vulkan graphics performance.

The Pro WX 7100 also shows a Metal score of 40,357 in the database, which is its best result. The RX 7700S has no Metal benchmark recorded. Additionally, the RX 7700S has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,185, a test the Pro WX 7100 did not run. These complementary benchmark sets mean the two cards cannot be fully compared across all workloads, but the overlapping tests (OpenCL and Vulkan) provide the clearest signal: compute favors the RX 7700S, graphics favors the Pro WX 7100.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Pro WX 7100 uses GCN 4.0 on 14 nm, while the RX 7700S uses RDNA 3.0 on 6 nm. Transistor counts are 5,700 million versus 13,300 million, and die sizes are 232 mm² versus 204 mm². The Pro WX 7100 has a base clock of 1188 MHz and boost of 1243 MHz, while the RX 7700S runs at 1500 MHz base, 2200 MHz game clock, and 2500 MHz boost. The RX 7700S has higher pixel rate (160.0 GPixel/s versus 39.78 GPixel/s) and texture rate (320.0 GTexel/s versus 179.0 GTexel/s).

FP32 performance is dramatically different: 5.728 TFLOPS for the Pro WX 7100 versus 20.48 TFLOPS for the RX 7700S. FP16 also diverges, with the Pro WX 7100 offering 5.728 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) and the RX 7700S offering 40.96 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). Power consumption favors the newer card: 100 W TDP for the RX 7700S versus 130 W for the Pro WX 7100. The RX 7700S is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors, while the Pro WX 7100 is a single-slot card requiring one 6-pin connector and a 300 W recommended PSU.

The Pro WX 7100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RX 7700S uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and has display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." API support differs: the Pro WX 7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the RX 7700S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7700S includes 32 RT cores, which the Pro WX 7100 lacks entirely. Production status also differs: the Pro WX 7100 is end-of-life, while the RX 7700S is active.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has an average benchmark score of 40,063, compared to 33,849 for the AMD Radeon RX 7700S. The Pro WX 7100 sits in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7700S sits in the 78th percentile.

Q: How does the RX 7700S achieve higher bandwidth with a narrower memory bus?

A: The RX 7700S uses GDDR6 memory at 18 Gbps effective speed on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s. The Pro WX 7100 uses GDDR5 at 7 Gbps on a 256-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The faster GDDR6 memory compensates for the narrower bus.

Q: Does the RX 7700S support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 7700S includes 32 ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 7100 has no ray tracing cores listed in the database, reflecting its older GCN 4.0 architecture.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The RX 7700S has a 100 W TDP, while the Pro WX 7100 has a 130 W TDP. The RX 7700S also requires no power connectors and is classified as an integrated graphics package, whereas the Pro WX 7100 is a single-slot card with one 6-pin connector.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two?

A: The RX 7700S achieves 65.2 million transistors per mm² on a 204 mm² die, while the Pro WX 7100 achieves 24.6 million transistors per mm² on a 232 mm² die. The RX 7700S benefits from the 6 nm process compared to the Pro WX 7100's 14 nm process.

Q: Which card is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The Pro WX 7100 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with 39,683 points versus 36,380 for the RX 7700S, a 9.1% advantage. This is the only head-to-head graphics test, and the older card wins it.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by workload type. The AMD Radeon RX 7700S is the compute champion, with a 36.3% OpenCL advantage and over 3.5x the FP32 throughput of the Pro WX 7100. It also brings modern features like ray tracing, DirectX 12 Ultimate, and Vulkan 1.4 support, all while consuming 30 W less power. For developers, researchers, or users running OpenCL-heavy applications, the RX 7700S is the superior choice despite its lower average benchmark score.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 holds the Vulkan crown with a 9.1% lead, and its overall average score is 18.4% higher than the RX 7700S. It also posts a strong Metal score of 40,357, which the RX 7700S cannot match due to lack of data. For Vulkan-based graphics workloads, macOS environments, or legacy GCN-optimized professional applications, the Pro WX 7100 remains viable even in end-of-life status.

The architecture gap is decisive: GCN 4.0 versus RDNA 3.0, 14 nm versus 6 nm, 5,700 million versus 13,300 million transistors. The newer card is objectively more advanced in process technology and raw compute, yet it loses the Vulkan test and has a lower average score. This suggests optimization differences matter as much as raw hardware. Users should choose based on their primary API: Vulkan or Metal leans toward the Pro WX 7100, while OpenCL and modern DirectX workloads lean toward the RX 7700S. Neither card is a universal winner, and the database reflects that with one win each in the head-to-head benchmarks.