AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 represent two vastly different eras of GPU design. The RTX 5090, built on a 5 nm TSMC process with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, delivers an average benchmark score of 79,842, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro WX 8200, a 14 nm GlobalFoundries part using GCN 5.0, averages 69,870 and sits in the 90th percentile. Despite the WX 8200's workstation pedigree, the data reveals a generational chasm in raw performance, with the RTX 5090 winning both head-to-head benchmarks by margins exceeding 379%.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 dominates every shared benchmark category, but the nature of its wins reveals distinct use-case strengths. In OpenCL compute, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370 against the WX 8200's 69,774 — a 379.2% advantage. This suggests the RTX 5090 is overwhelmingly better suited for general-purpose GPU compute workloads like scientific simulation, video encoding, and machine learning inference that leverage OpenCL. The Vulkan gap is even wider: 376,728 versus 69,076, a 445.4% delta. Vulkan's low-overhead API is popular in modern game engines and real-time rendering, so the RTX 5090's massive lead indicates it can handle the most demanding real-time graphics tasks with headroom to spare.

The WX 8200's only exclusive benchmark is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 70,759. While this test isn't available for the RTX 5090, it indicates the WX 8200 retains some relevance in macOS or Metal-based creative workflows. However, in every directly comparable test — OpenCL and Vulkan — the WX 8200 trails by margins that suggest it cannot compete in contemporary compute-heavy environments. The RTX 5090's 10 individual benchmark scores show particular strength in DirectX 12 (185 in Passmark DX12) and compute (26,756 in Passmark GPU Compute), while its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355 confirms modern gaming capability. The WX 8200, with only three benchmarks listed, simply lacks the breadth of testing data to establish wins outside its Metal niche.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is profound. The RTX 5090 uses the GB202 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die — a transistor density of 122.9M per mm². The WX 8200's Vega 10 chip uses GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, yielding just 25.3M transistors per mm². That's roughly a 4.9x density advantage for the RTX 5090, which explains how it fits 21,760 shading units versus the WX 8200's 3,584.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The RTX 5090 offers 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The WX 8200 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s. While HBM2's wide bus is impressive for 2018, the RTX 5090's bandwidth is 3.5x higher. The RTX 5090 also brings hardware ray tracing (170 RT cores) and tensor processing (680 tensor cores), features entirely absent from the WX 8200, which lists no RT or tensor core counts. The WX 8200's FP16 performance of 21.50 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) actually exceeds its FP32 rate of 10.75 TFLOPS, whereas the RTX 5090 achieves 104.8 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1) — a doubling of compute precision capability.

Process node differences also affect power efficiency. The RTX 5090 has a 575 W TDP and requires a 950 W suggested PSU, while the WX 8200 draws 230 W with a 550 W PSU recommendation. The RTX 5090's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the WX 8200's PCIe 3.0 x16 bandwidth. Display outputs also differ: the RTX 5090 offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the WX 8200 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two directly comparable benchmarks paint a stark picture. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370 versus 69,774 for the WX 8200, a 379.2% delta. This isn't a marginal win — it's a four-and-a-half-fold performance gap. OpenCL is heavily used in rendering, physics simulation, and data processing, so the RTX 5090's lead means compute tasks that take one hour on the WX 8200 would finish in roughly 16 minutes on the RTX 5090. The RTX 5090's 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 rate versus 10.75 TFLOPS for the WX 8200 (a 9.7x difference) helps explain this massive OpenCL advantage.

Geekbench Vulkan shows an even larger relative gap: 376,728 versus 69,076, a 445.4% delta. Vulkan's multi-threaded nature and lower driver overhead favor newer architectures, and the RTX 5090's Blackwell design exploits this fully. The WX 8200's GCN 5.0 architecture, launched in 2018, was designed before Vulkan 1.4 (the RTX 5090 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 8200 supports 1.3). The RTX 5090's 1,636.8 GTexel/s texture rate and 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate dwarf the WX 8200's 336.0 GTexel/s and 96.00 GPixel/s, making the Vulkan result unsurprising.

The RTX 5090 wins both head-to-head tests, giving it a 2-0 record. The WX 8200's best result — 70,759 in Metal — would still place it below the RTX 5090's lowest comparable score. When considering the RTX 5090's nearest rivals (Tesla P100 variants and Radeon RX 6850M XT within 1.1% delta), it's clear the RTX 5090 sits in a performance tier the WX 8200 cannot reach; the WX 8200's closest competitor is the Quadro P6000 at -0.2% delta.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 5090 delivers 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 and 104.8 TFLOPS FP16, compared to the WX 8200's 10.75 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.50 TFLOPS FP16. In OpenCL, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370 versus 69,774.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 8200 support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The WX 8200's specifications list no RT cores or tensor cores. The RTX 5090 includes 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI processing.

Q: How do memory capacities compare?

A: The RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The WX 8200 offers 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The WX 8200 has a 230 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU, while the RTX 5090 has a 575 W TDP and 950 W suggested PSU. The RTX 5090 uses a 5 nm TSMC process versus 14 nm GlobalFoundries.

Q: What API support differences exist?

A: The RTX 5090 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The WX 8200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5090 averages 79,842 across its benchmark suite, placing in the 92nd percentile. The WX 8200 averages 69,870, placing in the 90th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 |

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

| Process Node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 92,200 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 750 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 122.9M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2017 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2407 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory | 32 GB GDDR7 | 8 GB HBM2 |

| Memory Bus | 512 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.79 TB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 21,760 | 3,584 |

| TMUs | 680 | 224 |

| ROPs | 176 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 170 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 680 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 423.6 GPixel/s | 96.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,636.8 GTexel/s | 336.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 104.8 TFLOPS | 10.75 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) | 21.50 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 575 W | 230 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 950 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

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

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 304 mm | 267 mm |

| Height | 137 mm | 111 mm |

| Width | 40 mm | Not specified |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-01-29 | 2018-08-12 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,999 USD | 999 USD |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 5090 outperforms the WX 8200 in every directly comparable metric. Its 379.2% OpenCL lead and 445.4% Vulkan lead are not incremental improvements but generational leaps. The RTX 5090's 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 versus 10.75 TFLOPS represents a 9.7x compute advantage, and its 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth is 3.5x higher. For users running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads — the only shared benchmarks — the RTX 5090 is the only rational choice, provided the 575 W TDP and 950 W PSU requirement can be met.

The WX 8200's strengths are limited to its Metal benchmark (70,759) and its lower 230 W power draw. Its 8 GB HBM2 memory, while fast for 2018, is now a constraint for modern datasets. The WX 8200's 90th percentile standing shows it remains a capable GPU relative to all hardware, but its nearest rivals — the Quadro P6000 (-0.2%) and RTX A3000 Mobile (-0.4%) — are similarly dated.

Who should pick the RTX 5090? Anyone requiring maximum compute throughput, modern API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4), hardware ray tracing, or 32 GB of memory. Its 92nd percentile rank and 79,842 average score confirm it belongs to the highest performance tier. Who should pick the WX 8200? Users with legacy Metal-based workflows who need 4x mini-DisplayPort outputs and can operate within 230 W. Its 90th percentile standing and 69,870 average score make it a competent but aging workstation part. The data simply cannot justify choosing the WX 8200 for any workload where the RTX 5090's benchmarks apply.