AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 records an average benchmark score of 64,212, which places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 has an average score of 44,075, placing it in the 84th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 scores 193,937 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 scores 66,605. This represents a 65.7% advantage for the NVIDIA card in this test.

Q: What memory configurations do these workstation cards offer?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 features 16 GB of HBM2 memory with a 2048-bit bus and 483.8 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 offers 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density on its chip?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000, built on Samsung's 8 nm process, has a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm node, reaches 25.3M per mm².

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life products in the database. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 was released in July 2017, and the NVIDIA RTX A6000 followed in October 2020.

Q: What is the difference in peak single-precision compute?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 delivers 38.71 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card also sustains FP16 at the same 38.71 TFLOPS rate (1:1), whereas the AMD card doubles its FP32 rate to 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1).

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 uses the GA102 chip with Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm node. This process difference is visible in the physical data: the AMD chip packs 12,500 million transistors into a 495 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip fits 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die. The resulting transistor density is nearly double on the NVIDIA side, at 45.1M per mm² versus 25.3M per mm².

Compute resources differ sharply. The AMD card carries 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA card scales to 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. Critically, the RTX A6000 includes dedicated hardware that the WX 9100 lacks entirely: 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores. The AMD card has no equivalent acceleration blocks, leaving it reliant on traditional shader-based compute.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD card uses HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, achieving 483.8 GB/s bandwidth across 16 GB. The NVIDIA card uses GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, reaching 768.0 GB/s with 48 GB capacity. The NVIDIA solution offers triple the capacity and roughly 59% more bandwidth.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD card runs at 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA card runs higher at 1410 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost. Memory clocks are also higher on the NVIDIA side: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective).

The cards also differ in interface support. The AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear segmentation. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior compute card in raw throughput, with a 65.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a 66.7% lead in Geekbench Vulkan over the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100. For workloads that can use ray tracing or tensor operations, the RTX A6000's dedicated 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores provide capabilities the AMD card cannot match. Its 48 GB memory capacity and higher bandwidth also position it for larger datasets.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100, however, posts a higher average benchmark score in the database (64,212 versus 44,075) and a higher percentile ranking (89th versus 84th). This appears driven by its strong Geekbench Metal score of 71,319, a test the NVIDIA card does not have recorded. The AMD card also operates at a lower 230 W TDP versus 300 W, which may simplify system integration.

Who should pick which? Users prioritizing raw OpenCL and Vulkan compute, ray tracing, tensor workloads, or memory capacity should choose the NVIDIA RTX A6000. Users running Metal-based applications, where the AMD card records a substantial score, or those constrained by power consumption, may find the WX 9100 sufficient. The database's head-to-head results, however, show NVIDIA winning both available comparisons.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 | NVIDIA RTX A6000 |

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

| Chip | Vega 10 | GA102 |

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Samsung |

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

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.3M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1200 MHz | 1410 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1500 MHz | 1800 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 945 MHz, 1890 Mbps effective | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 48 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 2048 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 483.8 GB/s | 768.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 10752 |

| TMUs | 256 | 336 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| RT Cores | None | 84 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 336 |

| Pixel Rate | 96.00 GPixel/s | 201.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 384.0 GTexel/s | 604.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.29 TFLOPS | 38.71 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 230 W | 300 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

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

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Length | 267 mm | 267 mm |

| Height | 111 mm | 112 mm |

| Release Date | 2017-07-09 | 2020-10-04 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro GCN | Quadro Turing |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Vega | Workstation Ada |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these cards, and the NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both decisively.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 scores 193,937 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100's 66,605. The delta of 65.7% in NVIDIA's favor is substantial and reflects the underlying hardware disparity: the RTX A6000 has 2.6 times the shading units, nearly double the texture rate, and more than double the FP32 throughput.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the pattern repeats with a slightly larger gap. The NVIDIA card scores 164,462, while the AMD card manages 54,711. This 66.7% delta underscores the NVIDIA card's advantage in modern low-level graphics APIs, where the Ampere architecture's newer feature set and higher clocks contribute to better utilization.

The AMD card does not record wins in any head-to-head benchmark in the database. However, its overall average benchmark score includes a Geekbench Metal result of 71,319, a test absent from the NVIDIA card's records. This Metal score, combined with its OpenCL and Vulkan results, lifts the AMD card's average to 64,212, which exceeds the NVIDIA card's 44,075 average. The NVIDIA card's average is dragged down by its Passmark results, which include low DirectX scores (155 for DirectX 10, 191 for DirectX 11, 87 for DirectX 12, 245 for DirectX 9) alongside a strong Passmark G3D score of 22,577 and GPU compute score of 14,110.

The nearest rival data places the AMD card in a tight cluster. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (0.6% ahead), AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (0.6% ahead), AMD Radeon RX 7600M (0.7% ahead), and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (0.8% ahead). The NVIDIA RTX A6000 sits near the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, which is 1.6% ahead, while the GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile trails by 0.9% and the Quadro M6000 trails by 1.8%.

Looking at the full picture, the head-to-head results favor the NVIDIA card by two wins to zero. The performance deltas of roughly two-thirds in each test are decisive. The AMD card's higher average score stems from benchmark coverage differences rather than direct performance superiority in shared tests. For buyers focused on OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the database's measured results leave no ambiguity about which card delivers more compute throughput.