AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 represent two very different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a generational chasm. The RTX 4070 SUPER, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, is a modern high-end consumer card, while the Radeon Pro WX 7100 is a professional workstation card based on the older GCN 4.0 architecture. The data shows a decisive performance advantage for the newer NVIDIA part, but the AMD card retains relevance in specific legacy workstation contexts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The available direct head-to-head benchmark results are sparse but decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER scores 172,795, which is a staggering 330.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100’s score of 40,148. This is not a marginal victory; it is a complete rout. The data indicates that the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers more than four times the raw compute throughput in this general-purpose GPU compute workload, making it vastly superior for any OpenCL-accelerated task such as rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference.

The Vulkan graphics API test tells an even more lopsided story. Here, the RTX 4070 SUPER achieves a score of 205,624, which is 418.2% ahead of the Radeon Pro WX 7100’s 39,683. This massive delta in Vulkan performance underscores the architectural gulf between the two cards. The RTX 4070 SUPER’s modern shader cores, dedicated ray tracing hardware, and significantly higher clock speeds translate into a graphics powerhouse, while the older GCN-based WX 7100 struggles to keep pace in a modern, low-overhead API. In total, the head-to-head comparison shows the NVIDIA card winning both of the two benchmark tests, with zero wins for the AMD card.

Beyond these direct comparisons, the broader benchmark averages reinforce the NVIDIA card’s dominance. The RTX 4070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 43,223 across all its tested workloads, which places it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. In contrast, the Radeon Pro WX 7100 averages 40,063, sitting just one percentile lower at 82. While the percentile ranking is similar, the raw score difference is notable, and the RTX 4070 SUPER’s score is buoyed by a wide range of tests including DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, as well as compute and 2D benchmarks. The AMD card, however, only has three benchmark entries (Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), limiting its comparative scope.

The performance gap is also visible in the nearest rival data. The RTX 4070 SUPER’s closest competitors are older NVIDIA professional cards like the Quadro M6000 and the mobile RTX 4090, all of which it trails by less than 1%. Meanwhile, the Radeon Pro WX 7100’s nearest rivals include the Radeon Pro 580 and the RTX 5070, with the WX 7100 scoring just 1.3% higher than the RTX A500 Mobile. This positioning suggests that while the WX 7100 is competitive within its own performance tier, that tier is far below the one occupied by the RTX 4070 SUPER.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER scores 172,795, which is 330.4% higher than the Radeon Pro WX 7100’s 40,148.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 win any of the head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: No. The data shows the RTX 4070 SUPER winning both the Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan tests, giving NVIDIA 2 wins and AMD 0 wins.

Q: What is the average benchmark score and percentile ranking for each card?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 43,223 and sits in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 has an average score of 40,063 and sits in the 82nd percentile.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the AMD card shows a specific strength?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has a Geekbench Metal score of 40,357, but the NVIDIA card does not have a Metal score listed, so no direct comparison is possible. In the tests where both are measured, the AMD card is significantly behind.

Q: What kind of memory and interface do the two cards use?

A: The RTX 4070 SUPER uses 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient based on the provided data?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 7100 has a TDP of 130 W, while the RTX 4070 SUPER has a TDP of 220 W. However, given the massive performance delta, the RTX 4070 SUPER delivers far more performance per watt, although efficiency is not directly measured in the provided benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is built on the AD104 chip using the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 uses the Ellesmere chip based on the older GCN 4.0 architecture, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with only 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. This process and design difference explains the massive transistor density gap: 121.8M / mm² for the NVIDIA card versus 24.6M / mm² for the AMD card.

The compute resources are equally divergent. The RTX 4070 SUPER features 7,168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 80 raster operation units (ROPs). Critically, it also includes 56 dedicated ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI features. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 has only 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor cores at all. This means the AMD card is purely a rasterization and compute device, while the NVIDIA card is built for modern graphics workloads.

Clock speeds and memory technology also highlight the generational gap. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a base clock of 1980 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, paired with fast GDDR6X memory running at 21 Gbps effective. The WX 7100 has a base clock of just 1188 MHz and a boost of 1243 MHz, using older GDDR5 memory at 7 Gbps effective. These differences cascade into the fill rates: the RTX 4070 SUPER achieves a pixel rate of 198.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 554.4 GTexel/s, while the WX 7100 manages only 39.78 GPixel/s and 179.0 GTexel/s, respectively.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER is the vastly superior GPU for any modern workload. Its OpenCL score is over four times higher, and its Vulkan score is over five times higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100. For users seeking maximum performance in gaming, 3D rendering, or GPU-accelerated compute, the RTX 4070 SUPER is the clear choice, provided the system can accommodate its 220 W TDP and dual-slot design. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, along with ray tracing and tensor cores, makes it future-proof for years to come.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100, however, is not without a purpose. Its single-slot design, lower 130 W TDP, and 300 W suggested PSU make it suitable for dense workstation configurations where space and power are at a premium. With four DisplayPort outputs, it is also well-suited for multi-monitor professional setups that do not require heavy 3D acceleration. Its 82nd percentile ranking shows it remains competitive within its own legacy performance tier, but its older GCN architecture and lack of modern features like ray tracing mean it is only advisable for specific legacy applications or where its unique physical characteristics are required. For almost all other scenarios, the RTX 4070 SUPER is the superior product.

Specification Differences

This section details the key technical specifications that differ between the two cards.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 |

|:---|:---|:---|

| Process Node | 5 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 35,800 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1980 MHz | 1188 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2475 MHz | 1243 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 504.2 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 7168 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 224 | 144 |

| ROPs | 80 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 56 | 0 |

| Tensor Cores | 224 | 0 |

| Pixel Rate | 198.0 GPixel/s | 39.78 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 554.4 GTexel/s | 179.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 35.48 TFLOPS | 5.728 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 220 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2024-01-16 | 2016-11-09 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | 799 USD |