AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare between the NVIDIA RTX A4500 and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 records an average benchmark score of 91,671, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 scores 64,212. This places the RTX A4500 roughly 43% higher in aggregate performance, and it sits in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 89th percentile for the Radeon Pro WX 9100.

Q: What are the head-to-head benchmark results for OpenCL and Vulkan?

A: The database lists two direct comparisons. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A4500 scores 141,837 against the WX 9100's 66,605, a 113% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX A4500 scores 129,980 versus 54,711, a 137.6% lead. The RTX A4500 wins both recorded tests.

Q: Which card has the higher memory bandwidth, and what are the specifications?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 has 640.0 GB/s of bandwidth with 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 provides 483.8 GB/s with 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. Despite the wider bus on the AMD card, the NVIDIA card delivers higher overall bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count and manufacturing process for each GPU?

A: The RTX A4500 uses the GA102 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process, containing 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die. The WX 9100 uses the Vega 10 chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, containing 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die.

Q: How do the shading units and compute capabilities differ?

A: The RTX A4500 has 7,168 shading units and delivers 23.65 TFLOPS FP32. The WX 9100 has 4,096 shading units and delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32. For FP16, the AMD card reaches 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA card matches its FP32 rate at 23.65 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

Q: Which card supports ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX A4500 includes dedicated ray tracing cores (56) and tensor cores (224). The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 has neither, as its GCN 5.0 architecture lacks these hardware accelerators.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 relies on the GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 10 chip, produced by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. This two-generation process gap is significant: the NVIDIA chip packs 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The AMD chip contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, with a density of 25.3 million per mm².

The compute pipelines diverge sharply. The RTX A4500 carries 7,168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. It also integrates 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores, making it a hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workload solution. The WX 9100 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor core equivalents. The AMD card's texture rate is slightly higher at 384.0 GTexel/s versus 369.6 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, but the pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 158.4 GPixel/s versus 96.00 GPixel/s.

Memory architectures are fundamentally different. The RTX A4500 uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 640.0 GB/s bandwidth. The WX 9100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth. The HBM2 implementation offers a much wider bus but lower effective bandwidth. Clock behavior also differs: the AMD card has a higher base clock (1200 MHz vs 1050 MHz) but a lower boost clock (1500 MHz vs 1650 MHz). Memory clock rates are not directly comparable due to different memory types.

API support shows generational differences. The RTX A4500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The WX 9100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card also uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD card is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs differ as well: four DisplayPort 1.4a on NVIDIA versus six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on AMD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers two compute-oriented tests, and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 dominates both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A4500 scores 141,837 against the WX 9100's 66,605. This represents a 113% delta, meaning the NVIDIA card more than doubles the AMD card's OpenCL throughput. The gap is substantial enough to suggest fundamentally different compute efficiency per watt and per transistor.

The Vulkan result is even more lopsided. The RTX A4500 posts 129,980, while the WX 9100 manages 54,711. The 137.6% delta indicates the NVIDIA architecture extracts significantly more graphics and compute performance from the Vulkan API. The WX 9100's GCN 5.0 architecture, despite its 2:1 FP16 ratio advantage, cannot translate that into higher Vulkan scores.

Notably, the WX 9100 has a Geekbench Metal score of 71,319, but the RTX A4500 has no recorded Metal benchmark, so no direct comparison is possible in that API. For OpenCL and Vulkan, the RTX A4500 wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in the head-to-head table. The average benchmark score difference reinforces this: 91,671 versus 64,212. The RTX A4500's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (0.6% higher), AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (0.9% lower), NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (4.8% lower), and AMD Radeon PRO W7600 (5.2% lower). The WX 9100's nearest rivals cluster much closer: NVIDIA CMP 30HX (0.6% higher), AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (0.6% higher), AMD Radeon RX 7600M (0.7% higher), and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (0.8% higher).

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A4500 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 5.0 |

| Process node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 12,500 million |

| Die size | 628 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor density | 45.1M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1050 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1650 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory size | 20 GB GDDR6 | 16 GB HBM2 |

| Memory bus | 320 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 640.0 GB/s | 483.8 GB/s |

| Shading units | 7168 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 224 | 256 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| RT cores | 56 | None |

| Tensor cores | 224 | None |

| Pixel rate | 158.4 GPixel/s | 96.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 369.6 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 23.65 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 23.65 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 230 W |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release date | 2021-11-22 | 2017-07-09 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 1,599 USD |

The Verdict

The data consistently favors the NVIDIA RTX A4500 across compute benchmarks and architectural capabilities. In head-to-head testing, it wins both OpenCL and Vulkan with deltas of 113% and 137.6%, respectively. Its average benchmark score of 91,671 sits 43% above the WX 9100's 64,212. The RTX A4500 also offers more memory (20 GB vs 16 GB), higher bandwidth (640.0 GB/s vs 483.8 GB/s), and nearly double the FP32 throughput (23.65 TFLOPS vs 12.29 TFLOPS).

The WX 9100 does hold specific advantages in the specification sheet. Its FP16 compute of 24.58 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX A4500's 23.65 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is slightly higher than 369.6 GTexel/s. Its six mini-DisplayPort outputs outnumber the NVIDIA card's four. Its base clock is higher at 1200 MHz versus 1050 MHz. However, none of these advantages translate into benchmark wins.

The RTX A4500 is also newer by over four years, released in late 2021 versus mid-2017. The AMD card carries a launch MSRP of 1,599 USD, while the NVIDIA card has no listed launch MSRP. Both cards are end-of-life products. For users prioritizing raw compute performance, modern API support, ray tracing, and AI acceleration, the RTX A4500 is the clear choice from the recorded data. The WX 9100 remains relevant only for workloads specifically requiring its FP16 ratio or its higher number of display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins in almost every measurable category. It dominates OpenCL compute with a 113% margin, making it the stronger option for general-purpose GPU compute tasks such as rendering, simulation, and data processing. Its Vulkan advantage of 137.6% indicates superior graphics performance in Vulkan-based applications. The 20 GB memory capacity and 640.0 GB/s bandwidth support larger datasets and textures than the WX 9100's 16 GB and 483.8 GB/s. The ray tracing cores and tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference, features the AMD card entirely lacks. The PCIe 4.0 interface doubles the bandwidth available to the CPU compared to PCIe 3.0.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 wins in specific niche areas. Its FP16 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX A4500's 23.65 TFLOPS, so workloads that can exploit the 2:1 FP16 ratio may see a slight advantage. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s edges out the NVIDIA card's 369.6 GTexel/s, benefiting texture-heavy rendering pipelines. The six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support more simultaneous displays than the RTX A4500's four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Its higher base clock of 1200 MHz may help in lightly loaded scenarios. The 2048-bit memory bus, while delivering less total bandwidth, could offer lower latency in certain access patterns.

The WX 9100 also has a lower TDP of 230 W compared to 200 W for the RTX A4500, meaning the NVIDIA card draws less power while delivering higher performance. Both cards require a 550 W suggested PSU, though the NVIDIA card uses a single 8-pin connector while the AMD card needs a 6-pin and an 8-pin. For users with multiple displays, the AMD card's six outputs are the deciding factor. For everyone else, the benchmark data points squarely to the RTX A4500.