AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 and NVIDIA Quadro M1000M 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 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 14% higher boost clock speed: 1219 MHz vs 1072 MHz
- Around 23% higher texture fill rate: 39.01 GTexel / s vs 31.78 GTexel / s
- Around 23% better floating-point performance: 1,248 gflops vs 1,017 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 1024x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB
- Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 5012 MHz
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 390 vs 308
- Around 16% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10245 vs 8849
- Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 46.988 vs 42.938
- Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.235 vs 137.786
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 12 June 2017 vs 18 August 2015 |
Boost clock speed | 1219 MHz vs 1072 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 39.01 GTexel / s vs 31.78 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 1,248 gflops vs 1,017 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz vs 5012 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 390 vs 308 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10245 vs 8849 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 46.988 vs 42.938 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.235 vs 137.786 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
- Around 7% higher core clock speed: 993 MHz vs 925 MHz
- Around 63% lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 54% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2844 vs 1843
- Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 38.33 vs 30.848
- Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 721.18 vs 438.581
- Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.056 vs 2.268
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4196 vs 3241
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4196 vs 3241
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 993 MHz vs 925 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2844 vs 1843 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 38.33 vs 30.848 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 721.18 vs 438.581 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.056 vs 2.268 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4196 vs 3241 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 vs 3709 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4196 vs 3241 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 vs 3709 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3350 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
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) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 | NVIDIA Quadro M1000M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1843 | 2844 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 390 | 308 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10245 | 8849 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 30.848 | 38.33 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 438.581 | 721.18 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.268 | 3.056 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 46.988 | 42.938 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.235 | 137.786 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3241 | 4196 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3709 | 3716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3241 | 4196 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3709 | 3716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1002 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 | NVIDIA Quadro M1000M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |
Code name | Lexa | GM107 |
Launch date | 12 June 2017 | 18 August 2015 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | $200.89 |
Place in performance rating | 831 | 834 |
Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Price now | $203.37 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 16.10 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1219 MHz | 1072 MHz |
Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 993 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,248 gflops | 1,017 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 512 |
Texture fill rate | 39.01 GTexel / s | 31.78 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 40 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,200 million | 1,870 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-A (3.0) |
Length | 145 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB / 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 56 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz | 5012 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |