AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs NVIDIA T550 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 has an average benchmark score of 40,063, while the NVIDIA T550 Mobile scores 33,161. The AMD part sits 13% higher on average, with a 2-0 win record in the head-to-head tests.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 40,148 points versus 35,521 for the NVIDIA T550 Mobile, a 13% advantage.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 also wins Vulkan, scoring 39,683 against 30,801 for the NVIDIA T550 Mobile. That is a larger margin of 28.8%.

Q: How do these GPUs rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 ranks at the 82nd percentile, while the NVIDIA T550 Mobile sits at the 77th percentile. Both are above average, but the AMD part is clearly higher.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card?

A: For the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (0.6% lower), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (0.8% lower), NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (1.3% higher), and AMD Radeon Pro 575 (1.3% higher). For the NVIDIA T550 Mobile, the closest are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile (0.0% delta), AMD Radeon Pro 570 (0.1% higher), NVIDIA P104-100 (0.5% lower), and NVIDIA T600 Mobile (1% lower).

Q: Do these cards support modern graphics APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan. However, the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.3, while the NVIDIA card supports Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card also supports DirectX 12_1, compared to 12_0 for AMD.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 is the higher-performing GPU in every recorded benchmark. It wins the OpenCL test by 13% and the Vulkan test by 28.8%. Its average score of 40,063 places it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA T550 Mobile manages only 33,161 and the 77th percentile. For workloads that rely on raw compute, particularly Vulkan, the AMD card is the obvious choice.

The NVIDIA T550 Mobile, however, is not without merit. Its 23 W TDP and IGP form factor make it a low-power, portable option. The AMD card draws 130 W and requires a 6-pin power connector. So, for a mobile workstation or a compact system where power and thermal limits are strict, the NVIDIA is a functional choice, but it offers roughly 17% lower average performance.

The verdict: pick the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 if you need maximum throughput and the system can support a 130 W card. Pick the NVIDIA T550 Mobile if you absolutely need a low-power, integrated solution and can accept a significant performance deficit.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs were tested in two common compute workloads: OpenCL and Vulkan. In both, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 outperforms the NVIDIA T550 Mobile.

The smaller margin is in OpenCL. The AMD scores 40,148 points, while the NVIDIA scores 35,521 points. This is a 13% advantage for the AMD. This is a meaningful gap, but not a dominant one. It suggests that in OpenCL-based applications, the NVIDIA is competitive but not equal.

The larger margin is in Vulkan. The AMD scores 39,683 points, while the NVIDIA scores 30,801 points. This is a 28.8% lead. This is a decisive difference. The data indicates that the AMD architecture handles Vulkan workloads with far more efficiency relative to its own score in OpenCL, while the NVIDIA part loses more performance when moving to this API.

Looking at the absolute scores, the AMD card is actually more consistent across the two APIs. Its Vulkan score is only 1.2% lower than its OpenCL score (39,683 vs 40,148). The NVIDIA T550, by contrast, sees a 13% drop when going from OpenCL to Vulkan (35,521 to 30,801). This suggests that the AMD part is more balanced across these two compute interfaces, while the NVIDIA card is weaker in Vulkan.

The wins are two for the AMD and zero for the NVIDIA. This is a clean sweep. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the AMD's 40,063 versus the NVIDIA's 33,161 is a 20.8% gap. This lines up with the individual results.

The nearest rivals for the AMD card are close in the average score. The AMD Radeon Pro 580 is just 0.6% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 is 0.8% lower. This puts the AMD in a tight cluster, though its 82nd percentile rank is higher than the T550's 77th.

For the NVIDIA T550, the closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile, which matches it exactly at 0.0% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro 570 is 0.1% higher. This shows the T550 is a mid-range part, and the AMD WX 7100 is in a higher tier.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every core specification.

Process and Foundry: The AMD uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA uses a 12 nm process from TSMC.

Transistors: The AMD has 5,700 million transistors, the NVIDIA has 4,700 million. The AMD also has a larger die at 232 mm², compared to 200 mm². Transistor density is similar: 24.6M per mm² for AMD, 23.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clocks: The AMD has a base of 1188 MHz and a boost of 1243 MHz. The NVIDIA has a lower base of 1065 MHz but a much higher boost of 1665 MHz. The AMD memory runs at 1750 MHz, and the NVIDIA memory runs at 1500 MHz. However, the effective memory speed is 7 Gbps for AMD and 12 Gbps for NVIDIA.

Memory: The AMD has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. The AMD has twice the memory capacity, four times the bus width, and 2.3 times the bandwidth.

Compute Units: The AMD has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD has 2.25 times the shaders and TMUs, but the same number of ROPs.

Rates: The AMD pixel rate is 39.78 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 179.0 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 106.6 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA has a 34% higher pixel rate, but the AMD has a 68% higher texture rate.

Floating Point: The AMD fp32 is 5.728 TFLOPS, and fp16 is 5.728 TFLOPS (1:1). The NVIDIA fp32 is 3.410 TFLOPS, and fp16 is 6.820 TFLOPS (2:1). The AMD has 68% higher fp32, but the NVIDIA has 19% higher fp16.

Power: The AMD TDP is 130 W, the NVIDIA is 23 W. The AMD requires a 300 W PSU and a 1x 6-pin connector; the NVIDIA has no power connectors.

Physical: The AMD is single-slot, 241 mm long, 112 mm tall. The NVIDIA is IGP (integrated) with no dimensions.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 and the NVIDIA T550 Mobile are built on fundamentally different architectures.

Architecture and Chip: The AMD uses the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, part of the Radeon Pro Polaris generation. The NVIDIA uses the Turing architecture with the TU117 chip, part of the Quadro Turing-M generation. These are different design philosophies: GCN 4.0 is an older, compute-oriented design, while Turing is a newer, more power-efficient design.

Memory Type: The AMD uses GDDR5 memory, while the NVIDIA uses GDDR6. GDDR6 is a newer, higher-speed memory standard. However, the AMD compensates with a much wider bus (256-bit vs 64-bit) and more memory (8 GB vs 4 GB). The result is that the AMD has much higher raw bandwidth despite the older memory type.

FP16 Support: The AMD supports fp16 at a 1:1 ratio with fp32 (5.728 TFLOPS for both). The NVIDIA supports fp16 at a 2:1 ratio, giving it 6.820 TFLOPS fp16, which is higher than its fp32. This means the NVIDIA has a potential advantage in mixed-precision workloads that can use fp16, even though its fp32 is lower.

API Support: The AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA has a slightly higher Vulkan version and a higher DirectX feature level.

Production and Successors: Both are end-of-life. The AMD's predecessor is the Radeon Pro GCN, and its successor is the Radeon Pro Vega. The NVIDIA's predecessor is the Quadro Pascal-M, and its successor is the Ampere-MW. The AMD has a release date in 2016 and a launch MSRP of 799 USD; the NVIDIA has no release date or MSRP in the database.

No ray tracing or tensor cores are listed for either card. Both are pure raster and compute designs.