AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs NVIDIA CMP 50HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 and the NVIDIA CMP 50HX, and in both cases the AMD card comes out ahead. The most striking gap appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the WX 8200 scores 69,076 against the CMP 50HX’s 47,445. That is a 45.6% advantage for the AMD part, a decisive margin that points to a substantial difference in compute throughput under the Vulkan API. The OpenCL results tell a similar story, though with a narrower gap: the WX 8200 posts 69,774 points, while the CMP 50HX manages 56,135, a 24.3% lead for AMD.

These two wins give the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 a clean 2-0 record in head-to-head testing. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX does not register a single victory in the recorded benchmarks. It is importantly the CMP 50HX lacks a Geekbench Metal score in the database, while the WX 8200 has one at 70,759, which further widens the overall picture but does not factor into the direct head-to-head count.

Looking at the broader database context, the WX 8200’s average benchmark score sits at 69,870, placing it at the 90th percentile among all GPUs. The CMP 50HX’s average is 51,790, which corresponds to the 86th percentile. That percentile difference is modest, but the raw score gap is substantial: the AMD card is roughly 35% ahead in average performance. The nearest rivals listed for the WX 8200 include the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 at 69,986 (0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile at 70,140 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA CMP 90HX at 69,000 (1.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE at 70,829 (1.4% behind). This cluster shows that the WX 8200 sits in a tight performance band, with all four rivals within a 1.4% range. For the CMP 50HX, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT at 50,951 (1.6% behind), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 at 50,001 (3.6% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti at 49,957 (3.7% behind), and the Intel Arc A550M at 49,737 (4.1% behind). The CMP 50HX leads all four, but the margins are smaller than the WX 8200’s advantage in the head-to-head.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins in both API-specific tests available for direct comparison. Its Vulkan score of 69,076 is not only 45.6% higher than the CMP 50HX’s 47,445, but it also exceeds the CMP 50HX’s OpenCL result of 56,135 by a wide margin. This suggests that the WX 8200 is particularly strong in compute workloads that leverage Vulkan, which is relevant for professional rendering and simulation tasks. Its OpenCL score of 69,774 is also 24.3% higher than the CMP 50HX’s OpenCL number, meaning the AMD card wins regardless of which compute API is used.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX, by contrast, does not win any recorded benchmark in this comparison. However, its profile in the database indicates it is not without strengths. Its average score of 51,790 places it above rivals like the RX 6900 XT, RX Vega 64, RTX 5070 Ti, and Intel Arc A550M, with margins ranging from 1.6% to 4.1%. The CMP 50HX also carries a higher raw FP32 throughput figure of 11.07 TFLOPS compared to the WX 8200’s 10.75 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 560.0 GB/s edges out the WX 8200’s 512.0 GB/s. These hardware specifications do not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded tests, but they indicate that the CMP 50HX is not a slouch in theoretical compute capacity.

The use-case split is clear: the WX 8200 is the choice for compute-heavy applications that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan, as demonstrated by its superior scores. The CMP 50HX, with no display outputs and a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, is positioned purely as a mining-oriented product, and its benchmark profile reflects that narrow focus. For general-purpose compute or professional graphics workloads, the WX 8200’s dual wins and higher average score make it the more versatile option.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 outperforms the NVIDIA CMP 50HX in every recorded benchmark. The Vulkan gap of 45.6% is particularly telling, as it shows a fundamental advantage in API efficiency that the CMP 50HX cannot overcome. The OpenCL margin of 24.3% reinforces this picture. If the task involves compute workloads using either of these APIs, the WX 8200 is the superior choice.

For users who prioritize raw benchmark performance, the WX 8200’s average score of 69,870 versus the CMP 50HX’s 51,790 is a decisive differentiator. The AMD card also benefits from a higher percentile ranking (90th versus 86th), which places it among the top-tier GPUs in the database. The CMP 50HX, while leading its own nearest rivals, simply cannot match the WX 8200’s absolute performance.

That said, the CMP 50HX is not without a niche. Its higher FP32 throughput (11.07 TFLOPS versus 10.75 TFLOPS) and larger memory bandwidth (560.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s) suggest it may excel in specific workloads that are not captured by the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests. However, with no display outputs and a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, the CMP 50HX is clearly designed for mining, not for professional graphics or general compute. The WX 8200, with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, is the more broadly applicable product.

The verdict is therefore: pick the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 if you need a GPU for compute or professional visualization tasks, as the benchmark data shows it wins decisively in both OpenCL and Vulkan. Pick the NVIDIA CMP 50HX only if your use case aligns with its mining-oriented design and you can tolerate its lack of display outputs and older bus interface. The recorded data does not support any scenario where the CMP 50HX is the better performer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has an average benchmark score of 69,870, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX has an average of 51,790.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two cards?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 scores 69,076, which is 45.6% higher than the NVIDIA CMP 50HX’s 47,445.

Q: Does the NVIDIA CMP 50HX win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No, the NVIDIA CMP 50HX loses both recorded benchmarks. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins the OpenCL test by 24.3% and the Vulkan test by 45.6%.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus with 560.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has a higher FP32 throughput at 11.07 TFLOPS, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200’s 10.75 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the display output capabilities of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX has no display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and foundries. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses the Vega 10 chip based on GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX uses the TU102 chip based on Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process by TSMC. The transistor counts differ significantly: the Vega 10 packs 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, while the TU102 packs 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die. This results in a slightly higher transistor density for the AMD chip at 25.3 million per mm², versus 24.7 million per mm² for the NVIDIA chip.

Clock speeds also differ. The WX 8200 has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 1500 MHz, while the CMP 50HX runs at 1350 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. Memory clocks are even more divergent: the WX 8200’s HBM2 runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), while the CMP 50HX’s GDDR6 runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The memory types themselves are fundamentally different, with HBM2 offering a 2048-bit bus width versus the CMP 50HX’s 320-bit bus, and the bandwidth figures are close despite the architectural differences: 512.0 GB/s for AMD versus 560.0 GB/s for NVIDIA.

The compute units show both similarities and differences. Both cards have 3584 shading units, but the AMD card has 224 texture mapping units and 64 ROPs, while the NVIDIA card has 192 TMUs and 80 ROPs. The CMP 50HX also includes 56 RT cores and 448 tensor cores, which are absent from the WX 8200. This gives the NVIDIA card dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations, though the recorded benchmarks do not reflect any advantage from these features. Pixel and texture rates reflect the clock and unit differences: the CMP 50HX achieves 123.6 GPixel/s versus the WX 8200’s 96.00 GPixel/s, while the WX 8200 achieves 336.0 GTexel/s versus the CMP 50HX’s 296.6 GTexel/s.

Power and interface specifications also separate the two. The WX 8200 has a 230 W TDP with a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector setup and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The CMP 50HX has a 250 W TDP with dual 8-pin connectors and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The bus interfaces are notably different: the WX 8200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the CMP 50HX uses only PCIe 1.0 x4, which severely limits host communication bandwidth. The CMP 50HX also has no display outputs, while the WX 8200 offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. API support differs as well, with the CMP 50HX supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 8200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The release timeline also differs: the WX 8200 launched on August 12, 2018, while the CMP 50HX launched on June 23, 2021. Both are now end-of-life products. The WX 8200 has a recorded launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the CMP 50HX has no launch MSRP in the database. The AMD card’s predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro GCN and its successor as Radeon Pro Vega, while the CMP 50HX has no recorded predecessor or successor.