AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 OEM

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 OEM videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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) 9 month(s) later
• Around 12% higher core clock speed: 925 MHz vs 823 MHz
• Around 37% higher boost clock speed: 1219 MHz vs 888 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 2x lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 130 Watt
• Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1536 MB
• Around 25% higher memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 5600 MHz
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.235 vs 67.697
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3709 vs 3665
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 3325
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3709 vs 3665
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 3325

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 OEM

• 2.2x more texture fill rate: 85.25 GTexel / s vs 39.01 GTexel / s
• 2.3x more pipelines: 1152 vs 512
• Around 64% better floating-point performance: 2,046 gflops vs 1,248 gflops
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 32.718 vs 30.848
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1021.371 vs 438.581
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.143 vs 2.268
• Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 56.509 vs 46.988
• Around 85% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5983 vs 3241
• Around 85% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5983 vs 3241

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 OEM

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.848 32.718
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	438.581 1021.371
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.268 3.143
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	46.988 56.509
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.235 67.697
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 5983
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 3665
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 3325
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 5983
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 3665
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 3325

Compare specifications (specs)