AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 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 7100
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 19% higher core clock speed: 1188 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- Around 16% higher boost clock speed: 1243 MHz vs 1075 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 92% lower typical power consumption: 130 Watt vs 250 Watt
- 1000x more memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1987.633 vs 1722.566
- 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 105.263 vs 38.225
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 597.677 vs 518.554
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10320 vs 9834
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10320 vs 9834
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 10 November 2016 vs 17 March 2015 |
Core clock speed | 1188 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1243 MHz vs 1075 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt vs 250 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1987.633 vs 1722.566 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 105.263 vs 38.225 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 597.677 vs 518.554 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10320 vs 9834 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3347 vs 3343 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10320 vs 9834 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3347 vs 3343 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X
- Around 7% higher texture fill rate: 192 billion / sec vs 179.0 GTexel / s
- Around 33% higher pipelines: 3072 vs 2304
- Around 17% better floating-point performance: 6,691 gflops vs 5,728 gflops
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 12 GB vs 8 GB
- Around 65% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 12929 vs 7847
- Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 834 vs 807
- Around 7% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 41155 vs 38420
- Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 157.231 vs 115.834
- Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 12.245 vs 10.152
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3700 vs 3575
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3700 vs 3575
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 192 billion / sec vs 179.0 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 3072 vs 2304 |
Floating-point performance | 6,691 gflops vs 5,728 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 12 GB vs 8 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 12929 vs 7847 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 834 vs 807 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 41155 vs 38420 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 157.231 vs 115.834 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 12.245 vs 10.152 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3700 vs 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3700 vs 3575 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X
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 7100 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7847 | 12929 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 | 834 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 38420 | 41155 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 115.834 | 157.231 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1987.633 | 1722.566 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.152 | 12.245 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 105.263 | 38.225 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 597.677 | 518.554 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10320 | 9834 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3575 | 3700 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3347 | 3343 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10320 | 9834 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3575 | 3700 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3347 | 3343 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 5307 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
Code name | Ellesmere | GM200 |
Launch date | 10 November 2016 | 17 March 2015 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | $999 |
Place in performance rating | 326 | 327 |
Price now | $539.99 | $1,999.99 |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 19.25 | 7.38 |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1243 MHz | 1075 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1188 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 5,728 gflops | 6,691 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2304 | 3072 |
Texture fill rate | 179.0 GTexel / s | 192 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt | 250 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,700 million | 8,000 million |
CUDA cores | 3072 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
HDCP | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 241 mm | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 6-pin + 8-pin |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 600 Watt | |
SLI options | 4x | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 12 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB / s | 336.5 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
FreeSync | ||
HDMI 2.0 | ||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost |