Radeon PRO WX 3100 vs Quadro RTX 4000

Place in the ranking	109	564
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	36.23	5.16
Power efficiency	17.01	7.02
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	TU104	Lexa
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	13 November 2018 (6 years ago)	12 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$899	$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 4000 has 602% better value for money than PRO WX 3100.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	2304	512
Core clock speed	1005 MHz	925 MHz
Boost clock speed	1545 MHz	1219 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	222.5	39.01
Floating-point processing power	7.119 TFLOPS	1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	144	32
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	36	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	241 mm	145 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	416.0 GB/s	96 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	6.5	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	7.5	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RTX 4000 39.71
+496%

PRO WX 3100 6.66

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RTX 4000 15299
+496%

PRO WX 3100 2565

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

RTX 4000 85815
+1026%

PRO WX 3100 7624

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

75−80
+477%

−477%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

11.99

15.31

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12

+0%

10−12

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Hitman 3	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Hitman 3	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Hitman 3	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7 +0%	7 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+0%

18−20

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Hitman 3	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

+0%

10−12

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

+0%

7−8

+0%

This is how RTX 4000 and PRO WX 3100 compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 is 477% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 71 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.71	6.66
Recency	13 November 2018	12 June 2017
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	65 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 496.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

PRO WX 3100, on the other hand, has 146.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 3100 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.