AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive advantage for the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124,287 points against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100's 66,605 points. That is an 86.6% higher score, meaning the NVIDIA part delivers nearly double the compute throughput in this workload. The gap is even wider in Geekbench Vulkan: 103,601 for the A5500 Mobile versus 54,711 for the WX 9100, a 89.4% difference. Both wins belong to NVIDIA, and there is no benchmark in the database where the AMD card comes out ahead.

Looking at the broader context, the RTX A5500 Mobile sits at the 94th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 113,944. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114,395 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation at 117,088 (2.7% ahead), and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 at 110,725 (2.9% behind). The A5500 Mobile is thus firmly in high-end territory, trading blows with workstation and datacenter cards that are not direct competitors in form factor or power envelope.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100, by contrast, records an average benchmark score of 64,212 and sits at the 89th percentile. Its closest rivals are much lower-end parts: the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63,842 (0.6% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M at 63,775 (0.7% behind). The WX 9100 is essentially at parity with these cards, none of which approach the performance class of the RTX A5500 Mobile. The delta between the two cards in the head-to-head is so large that no single workload in the recorded data would flip the result.

Breaking down the scores further, the RTX A5500 Mobile's OpenCL result alone exceeds the WX 9100's combined average of all its benchmark runs. The WX 9100 does have a Geekbench Metal score of 71,319, but there is no Metal result for the NVIDIA card in the database, so that metric cannot be compared directly. The Vulkan result for the A5500 Mobile (103,601) is nearly double the WX 9100's Vulkan result (54,711), and even the WX 9100's best recorded score, its Metal result at 71,319, falls well short of the A5500 Mobile's worst recorded score, the Vulkan run at 103,601.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 in OpenCL?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124,287 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the WX 9100 scores 66,605. That is an 86.6% higher score for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 113,944, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100's 64,212. The NVIDIA card also ranks at the 94th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 89th percentile for the AMD card.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The database records two shared benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile wins both. The win count is 2 for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

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

A: Both cards have 16 GB of memory, but the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile uses GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How does the RTX A5500 Mobile compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile is 2.7% behind the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117,088 average score), 2.9% behind the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393), and 2.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725). It is essentially at parity with the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, which is only 0.4% ahead.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile has a TDP of 165 W, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 has a TDP of 230 W. The AMD card also requires a 550 W suggested power supply and uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors, whereas the NVIDIA card lists no power connectors and is described as portable device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile wins every workload where the two cards were measured against each other. In OpenCL, which often reflects raw compute throughput across a wide range of GPGPU applications, the A5500 Mobile's 124,287 score is 86.6% higher. In Vulkan, which tends to stress graphics and compute in modern APIs, the gap is even larger at 89.4%, with the A5500 Mobile scoring 103,601 versus 54,711. For any user running OpenCL-based rendering, simulation, or machine learning tasks, the data points strongly to the NVIDIA card.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 does have a Geekbench Metal score of 71,319, which is its best individual result. Since no Metal score is recorded for the RTX A5500 Mobile, the WX 9100 may have a niche advantage in macOS-centric workflows that rely on Metal. However, that score is still lower than the A5500 Mobile's Vulkan score and far lower than its OpenCL score, so it does not suggest any overall performance superiority. The WX 9100 also has a higher texture rate at 384.0 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s for the A5500 Mobile, which could theoretically benefit certain texture-bound tasks, but no benchmark in the database isolates that metric.

For use-case selection, the RTX A5500 Mobile is the clear pick for any application that uses OpenCL or Vulkan. That covers most modern compute and graphics APIs outside of Apple's Metal. The WX 9100 might be considered only if a workflow is strictly Metal-based and cannot use OpenCL or Vulkan, but even then the raw score gap suggests the NVIDIA card would likely outperform if a comparable test existed. The data does not show any scenario where the WX 9100 wins a recorded head-to-head.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge significantly in process technology, memory architecture, and compute resources. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile is built on Samsung's 8 nm process with 22,000 million transistors on a 496 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, a density of 25.3 million per mm². The die sizes are nearly identical, but the NVIDIA chip packs nearly twice as many transistors into the same area.

Memory bandwidth is close: 512.0 GB/s for the NVIDIA card versus 483.8 GB/s for the AMD card, a 5.8% difference in favor of NVIDIA. However, the memory type and bus width are radically different. The RTX A5500 Mobile uses GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with a memory clock of 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The WX 9100 uses HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with a memory clock of 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective). The HBM2's wide bus compensates for its slower clock, but the GDDR6 implementation still edges ahead in total bandwidth.

Compute unit counts also differ sharply. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, while the WX 9100 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has more shaders and more ROPs, but fewer TMUs. The NVIDIA card also features 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely; the WX 9100 lists no RT cores and no tensor cores. FP32 throughput is 22.27 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA card versus 12.29 TFLOPS for the AMD card, an 81.2% advantage. FP16 is more complex: the NVIDIA card does 22.27 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the AMD card does 24.58 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning the WX 9100 has higher raw FP16 throughput but at half the FP32 rate.

Other differences include the bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA, PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD), display outputs (portable device dependent for NVIDIA, 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for AMD), and physical dimensions. The WX 9100 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the NVIDIA card is a mobile part with no listed dimensions. The AMD card has a suggested PSU of 550 W and requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors; the NVIDIA card lists no power connectors. The TDP difference is notable: 165 W for the NVIDIA card versus 230 W for the AMD card.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile is based on the GA103 chip using the Ampere architecture, released in the Ampere-MW generation. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The architecture includes dedicated RT cores for ray tracing and tensor cores for AI acceleration, reflecting a modern GPU design aimed at both traditional graphics and compute-heavy workloads. The 8 nm process from Samsung allows for a high transistor density, which explains how it fits 22,000 million transistors into a 496 mm² die.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses the Vega 10 chip with GCN 5.0 architecture, part of the Radeon Pro Polaris generation. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GCN architecture is older, with no dedicated RT cores or tensor cores. It relies on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, which limits transistor density to 25.3 million per mm². The 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die indicate a much simpler design compared to the NVIDIA part.

The FP16 capability is a key architectural difference. The NVIDIA card achieves FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it does not gain extra throughput when using half precision. The AMD card achieves FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput (24.58 TFLOPS) is double its FP32 throughput (12.29 TFLOPS). This could make the WX 9100 attractive for certain workloads that heavily use FP16, but the NVIDIA card's higher FP32 baseline means it still wins in most compute scenarios.

The memory architecture also reflects different design philosophies. The NVIDIA card uses a narrower GDDR6 bus but achieves higher bandwidth through faster memory clocks. The AMD card uses a massive 2048-bit HBM2 bus, which is wider but slower per pin. The HBM2 approach reduces the physical footprint of memory chips, but the overall bandwidth is slightly lower. The RTX A5500 Mobile's PCIe 4.0 interface doubles the bandwidth potential of the WX 9100's PCIe 3.0 interface, which matters for data transfer in systems that support PCIe 4.0.

The Verdict

The data in the database points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile is the superior GPU in nearly every measurable way. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 86.6% and 89.4%, has a higher average benchmark score (113,944 versus 64,212), and ranks higher in percentile among all GPUs (94th versus 89th). Its FP32 throughput is 81.2% higher, its memory bandwidth is 5.8% higher, and it consumes 65 W less power. For any user running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the choice is unambiguous.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 does have some advantages in the recorded specifications. Its FP16 throughput is higher at 24.58 TFLOPS compared to 22.27 TFLOPS, which could matter for specific half-precision compute tasks. Its texture rate is 384.0 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s, and it has more TMUs (256 versus 232). It also has a Metal benchmark score of 71,319, which the NVIDIA card lacks. However, none of these advantages translate into a win in the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, and the WX 9100's overall performance class is much lower.

The RTX A5500 Mobile is the right choice for professionals who need maximum compute performance in a mobile form factor, especially those using ray tracing, AI, or high-precision compute. The WX 9100 might be considered by users with a strict Metal-only workflow or those needing a dual-slot workstation card with six mini-DisplayPort outputs, but the performance gap is so large that even those use cases are hard to justify based on the data. The VTX A5500 Mobile is end-of-life and released in 2022, while the WX 9100 is also end-of-life and released in 2017; both are legacy products, but the NVIDIA card is five years newer and delivers roughly double the performance per watt in the benchmarks recorded.