AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits the two contenders almost perfectly down the middle, with each card taking one decisive victory in the shared tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 edges out the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 by a narrow margin, scoring 40,148 against 39,688. That 1.1% delta is close enough to call it a statistical tie in raw compute workloads, but the story changes dramatically in the Vulkan test.

The Quadro M6000 absolutely dominates in Geekbench Vulkan, posting 46,913 versus the Radeon Pro WX 7100's 39,683. That is an 18.2% advantage for NVIDIA, a gap that will matter for any application leveraging modern graphics APIs. When you average the two results together, the Quadro M6000 lands at 43,301 points, while the Radeon Pro WX 7100 trails at 40,063 — a difference of roughly 8.1% in favor of the NVIDIA card overall.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the Quadro M6000 sits at the 84th percentile of all GPUs, with its average score of 43,301 placing it within 0.1% of the GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile and the Quadro M6000 24 GB, and just 0.2% ahead of the GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER. The Radeon Pro WX 7100, by contrast, holds the 82nd percentile with its 40,063 average, landing 0.6% behind the Radeon Pro 580 and 0.8% behind the GeForce RTX 5070. The NVIDIA card's Vulkan strength clearly pushes its aggregate score higher, and that 18.2% win is the single largest performance differential in any head-to-head comparison between these two.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture using the GM200 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The die is massive at 601 mm² and packs 8,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 13.3 million per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 takes a fundamentally different approach, using AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, built on a much smaller 232 mm² die at GlobalFoundries using a 14 nm process. AMD's chip contains 5,700 million transistors but achieves a higher density of 24.6 million per square millimeter thanks to the newer node.

These architectural choices ripple through every specification. The Quadro M6000 fields 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, while the Radeon Pro WX 7100 counters with 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and just 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA card's ROP advantage is substantial and helps explain its pixel throughput dominance. Clock speeds tell the opposite story: the AMD card runs at a base of 1,188 MHz and boosts to 1,243 MHz, while the Quadro M6000 sits lower at 988 MHz base and 1,114 MHz boost. Yet raw clocks don't tell the full performance story — the Quadro's wider memory bus and higher ROP count compensate for its lower frequencies.

Memory configurations diverge significantly. The Quadro M6000 carries 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 317.4 GB/s of bandwidth with memory clocked at 6.6 Gbps effective. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a narrower 256-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s at 7 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA card's 41.7% bandwidth advantage (317.4 vs 224.0 GB/s) is a direct consequence of the wider bus. Compute throughput also favors NVIDIA: 6.844 TFLOPS FP32 versus 5.728 TFLOPS for AMD. Notably, the Radeon Pro WX 7100 offers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (5.728 TFLOPS), while the Quadro M6000 lists no FP16 capability at all.

Power and physical characteristics differ just as starkly. The Quadro M6000 draws 250 W and requires a dual-slot cooler with a single 8-pin connector and a 600 W suggested PSU. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 sips 130 W, fits in a single slot, needs only a 6-pin connector, and works with a 300 W PSU. The AMD card is also shorter at 241 mm versus 267 mm, though both are equal in height at 111 mm and 112 mm respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro WX 7100 takes the compute-oriented OpenCL test, and its 1.1% lead there suggests it holds its own in general-purpose GPU workloads that don't heavily rely on advanced graphics features. Its single-slot design and 130 W power draw make it the clear choice for dense multi-GPU workstations or systems with strict power and space constraints. The 1:1 FP16 support is another feather in AMD's cap for workloads that can exploit reduced precision.

The Quadro M6000 wins decisively on Vulkan performance, and that 18.2% gap is not something to wave off. Applications that use Vulkan for rendering, simulation, or compute will see a meaningful advantage on the NVIDIA card. The 12 GB memory capacity also gives it breathing room for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures compared to the Radeon's 8 GB. Its 96 ROPs versus 32 ROPs means the Quadro should excel at fill-rate-bound tasks like heavy rasterization, and the 317.4 GB/s bandwidth supports data-intensive rendering scenarios.

In the overall average benchmark score, the Quadro M6000 leads by roughly 8%, which reflects its stronger aggregate showing across the two shared tests. That said, the Radeon Pro WX 7100's lower power envelope and smaller footprint make it a better fit for environments where thermal and electrical budgets are tight.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process node | 28 nm TSMC | 14 nm GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | 5,700 million |

| Die size | 601 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Transistor density | 13.3M / mm² | 24.6M / mm² |

| Base clock | 988 MHz | 1,188 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1,114 MHz | 1,243 MHz |

| Memory clock | 6.6 Gbps effective | 7 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 12 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory bus | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 317.4 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 3,072 | 2,304 |

| TMUs | 192 | 144 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| Pixel rate | 106.9 GPixel/s | 39.78 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 213.9 GTexel/s | 179.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 6.844 TFLOPS | 5.728 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | N/A | 5.728 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 130 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 300 W |

| Display outputs | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 267 mm | 241 mm |

| Height | 111 mm | 112 mm |

| Release date | 2015-03-20 | 2016-11-09 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 799 USD |

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 40,148 points versus the NVIDIA Quadro M6000's 39,688, a 1.1% margin that is effectively a tie.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The Quadro M6000 scores 46,913 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 18.2% higher than the Radeon Pro WX 7100's 39,683. This is the largest performance difference between the two cards.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro M6000 provides 317.4 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the Radeon Pro WX 7100 delivers 224.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, giving NVIDIA a 41.7% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 7100 support FP16 compute?

A: Yes, it offers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 5.728 TFLOPS. The Quadro M6000 lists no FP16 support.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro M6000 has a 250 W TDP, requires a 600 W PSU, and uses a dual-slot cooler with one 8-pin connector. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 has a 130 W TDP, needs a 300 W PSU, fits in a single slot, and uses one 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card has a higher aggregate benchmark score?

A: The Quadro M6000 averages 43,301 points across its benchmarks, which is about 8.1% higher than the Radeon Pro WX 7100's 40,063 average.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split based on workload priorities. If your applications lean on Vulkan, the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 is the unambiguous winner — its 18.2% advantage in that test is the single most decisive metric in this comparison, and it comes with 12 GB of memory and 317.4 GB/s of bandwidth to feed demanding rendering tasks. The Quadro also carries a higher overall average score (43,301 vs 40,063) and sits at the 84th percentile of all GPUs versus the Radeon's 82nd.

However, the Radeon Pro WX 7100 makes a compelling case for a different kind of build. Its 130 W TDP means you can run multiple cards in a single workstation without redesigning your power delivery, and the single-slot cooler lets you pack more compute density into a chassis. The OpenCL result (40,148 vs 39,688) shows it trades blows with the Quadro in general compute, and the 1:1 FP16 support gives it an edge for precision-flexible workloads. Its newer 14 nm process, smaller 232 mm² die, and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also indicate a more modern feature set.

For a builder prioritizing raw graphics throughput, Vulkan performance, and memory capacity, the Quadro M6000 is the pick. For someone who needs a low-power, compact card that handles OpenCL compute and fits in tight spaces, the Radeon Pro WX 7100 holds its own. Both cards are end-of-life products, so availability and driver maturity should factor into any decision, but the benchmark results clearly favor NVIDIA for graphics-heavy tasks and AMD for efficiency-minded compute deployments.