AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs NVIDIA L4 Comparison

NVIDIA L4 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200: the recorded data shows a decisive generational shift. The NVIDIA L4 delivers roughly double the average benchmark score of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200, with a 101.8% lead in OpenCL and a 75.6% lead in Vulkan. The L4 sits at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the WX 8200 sits at the 90th, but the absolute performance gap is far larger than that percentile difference suggests.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA L4 has an average benchmark score of 131,072, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has an average score of 69,870. The L4 outperforms the WX 8200 by 101.8% in OpenCL and by 75.6% in Vulkan.

Q: How does the NVIDIA L4 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The L4 is 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti (131,938 average), 3.1% behind both the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation and NVIDIA A10M (135,218 and 135,230 averages), and 3.2% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396 average).

Q: How does the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The WX 8200 is 0.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (69,986 average), 0.4% behind the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile (70,140 average), 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69,000 average), and 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829 average).

Q: What are the architecture and process node differences?

A: The NVIDIA L4 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with the AD104 chip containing 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, with the Vega 10 chip containing 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The NVIDIA L4 has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus with 300.1 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048 bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA L4 has 60 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 has no dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as its GCN 5.0 architecture predates those features.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA L4 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 represent different eras of GPU design. The L4 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC, packing 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The WX 8200 uses the older GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries, with 12,500 million transistors on a much larger 495 mm² die, giving a density of only 25.3 million per mm². The L4 achieves roughly five times the transistor density of the WX 8200.

The compute resources differ sharply. The L4 has 7,424 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units. The WX 8200 has 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The L4 also includes 60 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores, while the WX 8200 has none. This architectural gap is reflected in the FP32 throughput: the L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS, while the WX 8200 delivers 10.75 TFLOPS. In FP16, the L4 maintains 30.29 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the WX 8200 offers 21.50 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is halved relative to FP32.

The memory subsystems are also fundamentally different. The L4 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, providing 300.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 8200 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048 bit bus, providing 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The WX 8200 has nearly 71% more memory bandwidth, but only one third of the memory capacity. The L4 also supports newer API standards, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 8200 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear and consistent winner. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA L4 scores 140,838 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200's 69,774, a delta of 101.8%. This means the L4 more than doubles the WX 8200's performance in this compute workload. In Geekbench Vulkan, the L4 scores 121,306 against the WX 8200's 69,076, a delta of 75.6%. The L4 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, giving it 2 wins against 0 for the WX 8200.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this dominance. The L4 averages 131,072 across its recorded tests, while the WX 8200 averages 69,870. The L4's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti, scores 131,938, which is only 0.7% higher, placing the L4 in the same performance tier as a flagship consumer card. The WX 8200's nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P6000, scores 69,986, just 0.2% higher, indicating the WX 8200 is competitive with older professional cards but far behind the L4.

The percentile rankings contextualize these scores. The L4 sits at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it outperforms 95% of the database's tracked graphics cards. The WX 8200 sits at the 90th percentile. While both are high performers, the L4's placement in the top 5% of all GPUs reflects its substantial lead over the WX 8200, which sits in the top 10% but with a much lower absolute score.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification. The NVIDIA L4 uses the AD104 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses the Vega 10 chip with GCN 5.0 architecture. The process nodes are 5 nm (TSMC) versus 14 nm (GlobalFoundries). Transistor counts are 35,800 million versus 12,500 million, and die sizes are 294 mm² versus 495 mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly. The L4 has a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 2040 MHz, while the WX 8200 has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 1500 MHz. The L4's memory runs at 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective), while the WX 8200's memory runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). Despite the WX 8200's higher base clock, the L4's boost clock is 36% higher.

Memory capacity and type differ: 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus versus 8 GB HBM2 on a 2048 bit bus. Bandwidth is 300.1 GB/s for the L4 versus 512.0 GB/s for the WX 8200. The L4 has 7,424 shading units, 240 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 60 ray tracing cores, and 240 tensor cores. The WX 8200 has 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and no ray tracing or tensor cores.

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The L4 has a 72 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply. The WX 8200 has a 230 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 550 W power supply. The L4 is 169 mm long and 56 mm high, while the WX 8200 is 267 mm long and 111 mm high. The L4 has no display outputs, while the WX 8200 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The L4 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the WX 8200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The L4 is listed as Active production, while the WX 8200 is End-of-life. The release dates are 2023-03-20 for the L4 and 2018-08-12 for the WX 8200.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA L4 wins in every recorded benchmark and in most specification categories. It has more than double the shading units, 4.5 times the FP32 throughput, and 3 times the memory capacity. Its ray tracing and tensor cores provide hardware acceleration that the WX 8200 lacks entirely. The L4's 72 W TDP is less than one third of the WX 8200's 230 W TDP, making it dramatically more power-efficient. Its single-slot design and lack of power connectors make it far easier to integrate into dense server environments. The L4 also supports newer API versions, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins in a few specific areas. It has 71% more memory bandwidth, at 512.0 GB/s versus 300.1 GB/s. Its HBM2 memory on a 2048 bit bus offers a fundamentally different memory architecture that may benefit certain bandwidth-bound workloads. It has four display outputs, while the L4 has none, making the WX 8200 suitable for direct display connectivity. The WX 8200 also has a higher base clock, at 1200 MHz versus 795 MHz, though its lower boost clock of 1500 MHz versus 2040 MHz diminishes that advantage.

The WX 8200's nearest rivals all score within 1.4% of its average, indicating it is a stable mid-tier performer. The L4's nearest rivals are all above 131,000, meaning the L4 competes with much higher-tier hardware despite its modest power draw. In the head-to-head comparison, the L4 wins 2 of 2 tests, with no recorded test favoring the WX 8200.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for most users. The NVIDIA L4 is the superior card for compute-intensive workloads, with 101.8% higher OpenCL performance and 75.6% higher Vulkan performance than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200. Its 131,072 average benchmark score places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the WX 8200's 69,870 average places it at the 90th percentile. The L4's modern architecture, 5 nm process, and dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores make it the better option for any workload that leverages these features.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 retains relevance in specific scenarios. Its higher memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s) and display outputs make it a viable choice for workstation setups that require direct monitor connections and memory-bandwidth-heavy tasks. However, its End-of-life production status, lower compute throughput, and lack of modern features like ray tracing and tensor cores limit its long-term utility. The WX 8200's nearest rivals, including the Quadro P6000 and RTX A3000 Mobile, all score within 1.4% of it, confirming it is a mid-tier card from its era.

For users choosing between these two, the NVIDIA L4 is the recommended pick for any AI, machine learning, or compute-oriented deployment. Its 30.29 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 24 GB memory capacity, and 72 W power draw make it a compact and efficient solution. The WX 8200 is only preferable if the workload specifically requires its 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth or its four display outputs, and even then, the L4's overall performance advantage in the recorded data is substantial. The L4 is the clear winner in this comparison.