AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1219 MHz vs 1033 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 134 Watt
• 1166.7x more memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 6.0 GB/s
• Around 7% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10246 vs 9583
• Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 30.848 vs 25.21
• Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.268 vs 2.026
• Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 46.988 vs 30.868
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.235 vs 51.009
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3709 vs 3642
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 3242
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3709 vs 3642
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 3242

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

• Around 6% higher core clock speed: 980 MHz vs 925 MHz
• Around 61% higher texture fill rate: 62.7 billion / sec vs 39.01 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 768 vs 512
• Around 27% better floating-point performance: 1,585 gflops vs 1,248 gflops
• Around 82% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3341 vs 1834
• Around 17% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 460 vs 393
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 561.43 vs 438.581
• Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3426 vs 3241
• Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3426 vs 3241

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1834 3341
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	393 460
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	10246 9583
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.848 25.21
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	438.581 561.43
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.268 2.026
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	46.988 30.868
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.235 51.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 3426
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 3642
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 3242
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 3426
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 3642
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 3242

Compare specifications (specs)