AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 vs NVIDIA Tesla T4 Comparison

NVIDIA Tesla T4 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 are both end-of-life workstation accelerators with 16 GB of memory, but they target fundamentally different workloads. The T4 is a 70 W single-slot server card built on Turing, while the WX 9100 is a 230 W dual-slot professional GPU with HBM2. Benchmark data shows the AMD card leads in OpenCL by 8%, while the NVIDIA card dominates Vulkan by 31.9%, making the choice heavily dependent on your software stack and power constraints.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla T4 has an average benchmark score of 66,733, which is 3.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100's 64,212. The T4 also ranks in the 90th percentile of all GPUs, one point higher than the WX 9100's 89th percentile.

Q: How do they compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 wins in the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 66,605 versus the Tesla T4's 61,276, a margin of 8% in AMD's favor.

Q: Which card is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla T4 is decisively better in Vulkan, scoring 72,190 compared to the WX 9100's 54,711. That is a 31.9% advantage for NVIDIA, the largest single-test gap between the two cards.

Q: What are the power and physical requirements?

A: The Tesla T4 has a 70 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and needs only a 250 W suggested PSU. The WX 9100 has a 230 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector, and needs a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: What memory technologies do they use?

A: The T4 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. The WX 9100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth, giving AMD a 51.2% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Do they have the same API support?

A: No. The T4 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The WX 9100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The underlying architectures are from different eras and design philosophies. NVIDIA's Tesla T4 uses the TU104 chip built on TSMC's 12 nm process, packing 13,600 million transistors into a 545 mm² die. AMD's Radeon Pro WX 9100 uses the Vega 10 chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. Interestingly, the transistor densities are nearly identical: 25.0M per mm² for NVIDIA and 25.3M per mm² for AMD.

The compute resources diverge significantly. The T4 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the WX 9100 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. AMD's raw shader count is 60% higher, which contributes to its higher texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA's 254.4 GTexel/s. However, NVIDIA includes specialized hardware that AMD lacks entirely: the T4 has 40 RT cores for ray tracing and 320 tensor cores for AI acceleration. These are absent from the WX 9100.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The T4 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s. The WX 9100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 483.8 GB/s. That bandwidth advantage is substantial and reflects AMD's focus on memory-heavy compute tasks.

Clock behavior also differs. The T4 has a low base clock of 585 MHz but boosts to 1590 MHz, while the WX 9100 runs at 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The T4's boost clock is 6% higher, but AMD's pixel rate of 96.00 GPixel/s is slightly lower than NVIDIA's 101.8 GPixel/s.

Power efficiency is starkly different. The T4 sips 70 W while the WX 9100 consumes 230 W. This is a 160 W gap that affects system design, cooling, and operating costs. The T4 also has no display outputs, while the WX 9100 provides 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards split their head-to-head benchmark wins, with each taking one test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 scores 66,605 against the Tesla T4's 61,276. The 8% delta is a clear but not overwhelming win for AMD. This result aligns with the WX 9100's higher raw compute throughput: 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 versus 8.141 TFLOPS for the T4.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a completely different story. The Tesla T4 scores 72,190, which is 31.9% higher than the WX 9100's 54,711. This is a decisive victory for NVIDIA and suggests that the T4's architecture handles Vulkan's driver and compute model far more efficiently, despite having fewer shading units and lower raw FP32 throughput.

When looking at average scores across all benchmarks, the T4 comes out ahead with 66,733 versus 64,212 for the WX 9100. The T4's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon VII (66,004, 1.1% behind) and the NVIDIA Tesla P40 (65,095, 2.5% behind), while the WX 9100 sits close to the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, 0.6% behind) and AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775, 0.7% behind). The T4's closest competitor above it is the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 (68,562, 2.7% ahead), while the WX 9100's nearest higher performer is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693, 0.8% behind it).

The Vulkan gap is the standout statistic. A 31.9% lead in one API while losing by only 8% in another indicates that the T4's Turing architecture is significantly better optimized for Vulkan's explicit programming model. The WX 9100's GCN 5.0 design, while strong in OpenCL, does not translate that performance to Vulkan.

The Verdict

Choose the NVIDIA Tesla T4 if your workloads rely on Vulkan, AI acceleration, or ray tracing. Its 31.9% Vulkan lead is enormous, and the presence of 320 tensor cores and 40 RT cores makes it the only option for those specialized tasks. The 70 W power draw and single-slot design also make it far easier to deploy in dense servers or systems with limited power headroom.

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 if your primary API is OpenCL and you need maximum memory bandwidth. Its 8% OpenCL win and 483.8 GB/s bandwidth make it strong for compute-heavy tasks that fit that model. The 6x mini-DisplayPort outputs also make it usable as a display card, which the T4 cannot do.

The average benchmark scores slightly favor the T4 (66,733 vs 64,212), but the real decision hinges on software compatibility. If your applications are Vulkan-based, the T4 is the clear winner. If they are OpenCL-based and you can handle the 230 W power draw and dual-slot footprint, the WX 9100 offers competitive performance with higher bandwidth.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla T4 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 |

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

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 13,600 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 545 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Base Clock | 585 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1590 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 320.0 GB/s | 483.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 160 | 256 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 40 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 320 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 8.141 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 16.28 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 70 W | 230 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Tesla T4 wins in:

• Vulkan performance: 31.9% ahead in the Geekbench Vulkan test (72,190 vs 54,711)
• Average benchmark score: 66,733 vs 64,212
• Power efficiency: 70 W TDP versus 230 W, with no power connectors required
• Physical footprint: single-slot and 168 mm length versus dual-slot and 267 mm length
• AI and ray tracing workloads: 320 tensor cores and 40 RT cores that AMD lacks
• API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 versus DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.3

AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 wins in:

• OpenCL performance: 8% ahead in the Geekbench OpenCL test (66,605 vs 61,276)
• Memory bandwidth: 483.8 GB/s versus 320.0 GB/s, a 51.2% advantage
• Raw compute throughput: 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 versus 8.141 and 16.28 TFLOPS
• Texture rate: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 254.4 GTexel/s
• Display capabilities: 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus none
• Shader resources: 4,096 shading units and 256 TMUs versus 2,560 and 160

The practical split is clear: the T4 is for Vulkan-centric compute, AI inferencing, and low-power server deployments. The WX 9100 is for OpenCL-heavy workflows, high-bandwidth memory tasks, and situations where display output is required. Neither card is universally superior, and the 1-1 split in head-to-head wins reflects that balance.