AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs AMD Radeon VII Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 and AMD Radeon VII are both end-of-life, dual-slot workstation-class GPUs from the same manufacturer, yet they represent distinctly different engineering approaches. The data reveals a clear performance hierarchy, with the Radeon VII winning all three head-to-head benchmarks by substantial margins, but the WX 8200 holds its own in specific compute contexts. The following analysis examines the architectural, specification, and benchmark data to understand where each card excels and which user should select which.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has a higher average benchmark score of 69,870, while the AMD Radeon VII averages 66,004. This is despite the Radeon VII winning every individual head-to-head test, because the Radeon VII’s average includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,304, which drags its overall average down.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon VII scores 77,975 in Geekbench Metal, which is 9.3% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200’s 70,759. This is the closest margin of the three head-to-head tests, indicating the WX 8200 is relatively stronger in Metal workloads than in other APIs.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest delta is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the AMD Radeon VII scores 91,788 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200’s 69,076, a difference of 24.7%. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a nearly identical gap, with the Radeon VII leading by 24.1%.

Q: Which GPU has more memory, and what is the bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Radeon VII has 16 GB of HBM2 memory with a 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200’s 8 GB of HBM2 with 512.0 GB/s. The Radeon VII offers double the capacity and double the bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards use the same process node?

A: No, they do not. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the AMD Radeon VII uses a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon VII’s more advanced node contributes to its higher transistor density of 40.0M / mm² versus 25.3M / mm².

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the WX 8200 wins?

A: In the head-to-head data provided, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins zero tests. However, its average benchmark score of 69,870 is higher than the Radeon VII’s 66,004, suggesting it may be more consistent across a broader range of workloads not covered in the direct comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on different iterations of the same Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses GCN 5.0 with the Vega 10 chip, while the AMD Radeon VII employs GCN 5.1 with the Vega 20 chip. This architectural revision, combined with a change in foundry and process node, defines the performance gap. The WX 8200 is fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm node, featuring 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. In contrast, the Radeon VII is built by TSMC on a 7 nm process, packing 13,230 million transistors into a much smaller 331 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 40.0M / mm² for the Radeon VII versus 25.3M / mm² for the WX 8200.

The generational classification also differs: the WX 8200 belongs to the "Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x200)" generation, while the Radeon VII is part of "Vega II (Radeon VII)". The Radeon VII’s successor is listed as "Navi", whereas the WX 8200’s successor is "Radeon Pro Vega". In terms of raw compute resources, the Radeon VII has more shading units (3,840 vs 3,584), more texture mapping units (240 vs 224), and the same number of render output units (64). Neither card features ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, so API compatibility is identical. The Radeon VII also includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark score, which the WX 8200 lacks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon VII wins all three tests. The smallest margin is in Geekbench Metal, where the Radeon VII scores 77,975 against the WX 8200’s 70,759, a 9.3% advantage. This suggests that Metal workloads, typically found in macOS applications, are the most favorable terrain for the older WX 8200 relative to the newer card. Moving to Geekbench OpenCL, the gap widens dramatically: the Radeon VII posts 91,947 versus 69,774, a 24.1% lead. This is a significant jump, indicating that the Radeon VII’s architectural improvements and higher clock speeds translate into much stronger general-purpose compute performance.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows the largest delta, with the Radeon VII scoring 91,788 and the WX 8200 at 69,076, a 24.7% difference. The consistency of these large margins in OpenCL and Vulkan, combined with the smaller Metal gap, paints a picture of a card that is broadly faster but especially dominant in cross-platform compute APIs. The Radeon VII also has a separate 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,304, though no comparable WX 8200 result exists for direct comparison. It is worth remembering despite winning all three tests, the Radeon VII’s average benchmark score (66,004) is lower than the WX 8200’s (69,870), highlighting the influence of that low 3DMark result on its aggregate.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key divergences beyond the architecture. The process node is a major differentiator: 14 nm for the WX 8200 versus 7 nm for the Radeon VII, with corresponding differences in die size (495 mm² vs 331 mm²) and transistor counts (12,500 million vs 13,230 million). Clock speeds also favor the Radeon VII, which has a base clock of 1400 MHz and a boost clock of 1750 MHz, compared to the WX 8200’s 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. Memory configurations are starkly different: the WX 8200 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, while the Radeon VII has 16 GB on a 4096-bit bus, resulting in bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s versus 1.02 TB/s.

Performance metrics scale accordingly. The Radeon VII delivers 13.44 TFLOPS FP32 and 26.88 TFLOPS FP16, while the WX 8200 offers 10.75 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.50 TFLOPS FP16. Pixel rates are 112.0 GPixel/s for the Radeon VII and 96.00 GPixel/s for the WX 8200; texture rates are 420.0 GTexel/s versus 336.0 GTexel/s. Power consumption differs as well, with the Radeon VII rated at 295 W TDP versus 230 W for the WX 8200, and the Radeon VII requires two 8-pin power connectors while the WX 8200 uses one 6-pin and one 8-pin. The suggested PSU is 600 W for the Radeon VII and 550 W for the WX 8200. Physical dimensions also vary: the WX 8200 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the Radeon VII is longer (280 mm), taller (125 mm), and has a listed width of 40 mm. Display outputs differ, with the WX 8200 offering four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and the Radeon VII providing one HDMI 2.0b plus three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon VII wins decisively in raw compute performance across all head-to-head benchmarks. Its advantages in FP32 (13.44 TFLOPS vs 10.75 TFLOPS) and FP16 (26.88 TFLOPS vs 21.50 TFLOPS) make it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks like rendering, simulation, and machine learning inference that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan. The 16 GB memory capacity and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth are particularly advantageous for large datasets or high-resolution textures that exceed the WX 8200’s 8 GB limit. The Radeon VII’s higher pixel and texture rates also give it an edge in rasterization-heavy workloads, despite having the same 64 ROPs.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200, despite losing every head-to-head test, has strengths that are not immediately obvious from those numbers. Its higher average benchmark score of 69,870 versus 66,004 suggests it is more consistent across a wider variety of tests, avoiding the low outlier that drags down the Radeon VII’s average. The smaller 9.3% deficit in Geekbench Metal indicates that in Metal-based environments—common in professional Apple ecosystems—the WX 8200 is far more competitive than in other APIs. Additionally, its lower TDP of 230 W and single 6-pin plus 8-pin connector requirement make it easier to integrate into systems with less robust power delivery. The four mini-DisplayPort outputs are also a distinct advantage for multi-monitor professional setups, whereas the Radeon VII offers only a single HDMI and three DisplayPorts.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon VII is the superior performer in every direct benchmark comparison. Users who prioritize raw compute throughput in OpenCL and Vulkan, need 16 GB of memory, or require the highest possible FP32 and FP16 throughput should choose the Radeon VII. Its 24.1% OpenCL and 24.7% Vulkan leads are decisive, and its 1.02 TB/s bandwidth is double that of the WX 8200. The Radeon VII also has a higher boost clock (1750 MHz vs 1500 MHz) and more shading units (3,840 vs 3,584), reinforcing its performance pedigree.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200, however, remains a viable option for specific use cases. Its higher average benchmark score and smaller Metal deficit suggest it may be more stable and better suited for Metal-centric workflows. Its lower power draw and simpler power connector requirements make it easier to deploy in existing workstations. For users running multiple displays, the four mini-DisplayPort outputs are a practical advantage. The WX 8200 also benefits from a higher percentile ranking (90th) matching the Radeon VII, indicating both are top-tier GPUs overall. Ultimately, the choice hinges on whether the user needs the Radeon VII’s massive compute and memory advantages or prefers the WX 8200’s consistency, lower power footprint, and multi-display connectivity. For pure performance, the Radeon VII wins; for balanced professional deployment, the WX 8200 holds its own.