NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super vs AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super and AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100 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 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 34% higher core clock speed: 1605 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1770 MHz vs 1500 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- Around 7% lower typical power consumption: 215 Watt vs 230 Watt
- 7.4x more memory clock speed: 14000 MHz vs 1890 MHz
- Around 42% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 18252 vs 12844
- Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 885 vs 769
- Around 54% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 99847 vs 64683
- Around 68% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 293.508 vs 174.714
- Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 4045.784 vs 3924.968
- Around 68% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 29.145 vs 17.305
- Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1438.826 vs 1226.861
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 25232 vs 13848
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3718 vs 3680
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3359 vs 3336
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 25232 vs 13848
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3718 vs 3680
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3359 vs 3336
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2 July 2019 vs 10 July 2017 |
Core clock speed | 1605 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1770 MHz vs 1500 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 215 Watt vs 230 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz vs 1890 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 18252 vs 12844 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 885 vs 769 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 99847 vs 64683 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 293.508 vs 174.714 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4045.784 vs 3924.968 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 29.145 vs 17.305 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1438.826 vs 1226.861 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 25232 vs 13848 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 vs 3680 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 vs 3336 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 25232 vs 13848 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 vs 3680 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 vs 3336 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 4096 vs 2560
- 2x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 8 GB
- Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 175.219 vs 158.103
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 4096 vs 2560 |
Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 8 GB |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 175.219 vs 158.103 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super
GPU 2: AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
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 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super | AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 18252 | 12844 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 885 | 769 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 99847 | 64683 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 293.508 | 174.714 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4045.784 | 3924.968 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 29.145 | 17.305 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 158.103 | 175.219 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1438.826 | 1226.861 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 25232 | 13848 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 3680 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3336 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 25232 | 13848 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 3680 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3336 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 7 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super | AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
Code name | TU104 | Vega 10 |
Launch date | 2 July 2019 | 10 July 2017 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | $1,599 |
Place in performance rating | 133 | 196 |
Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1770 MHz | 1500 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1605 MHz | 1200 MHz |
CUDA cores | 2560 | |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
Maximum GPU temperature | 88 C | |
Pipelines | 2560 | 4096 |
Render output units | 64 | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 215 Watt | 230 Watt |
Transistor count | 13.6 B | 12,500 million |
Floating-point performance | 12,288 gflops | |
Texture fill rate | 384.0 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Port | 1.4 | |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
G-SYNC support | ||
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Multi monitor support | ||
Number of simultaneous displays | 4 | |
Display Connectors | 6x mini-DisplayPort | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Height | 4.556” (115.7mm) | |
Length | 10.5” (266.74mm) | 267 mm |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 650 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | 6 pin + 8 pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Width | 2-Slot | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 16 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 448 GB/s | 483.8 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | 2048 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz | 1890 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |
Technologies |
||
Ansel | ||
HDMI 2.0b | ||
SLI | ||
VR Ready |