GeForce GT 710 vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with GeForce GT 710, including specs and performance data.

PRO WX 2100
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
4.78
+193%

PRO WX 2100 outperforms GT 710 by a whopping 193% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking643955
Place by popularitynot in top-10071
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.950.04
Power efficiency9.365.88
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameLexaGK208
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)27 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $34.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO WX 2100 has 9775% better value for money than GT 710.

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 cores512192
Core clock speed925 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,200 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data95 °C
Texture fill rate39.0115.26
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPS0.3663 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs3216

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x8
Length168 mm145 mm
Heightno data2.713" (6.9 cm)
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1.8 GB/s
Memory bandwidth48 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPortDual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data3 displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-
3D Vision-+
PureVideo-+
PhysX-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-+

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.

PRO WX 2100 4.78
+193%
GT 710 1.63

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.

PRO WX 2100 1841
+194%
GT 710 627

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 HD21−24
+163%
8
−163%
1440p10−12
+150%
4
−150%
4K16−18
+167%
6
−167%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.104.37
1440p14.908.75
4K9.315.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Hitman 3 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+93.8%
16−18
−93.8%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+32.4%
30−35
−32.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Hitman 3 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+93.8%
16−18
−93.8%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+240%
5
−240%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+32.4%
30−35
−32.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Hitman 3 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+93.8%
16−18
−93.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+240%
5
−240%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+467%
3
−467%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+32.4%
30−35
−32.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Hitman 3 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5
+0%
5
+0%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and GT 710 compete in popular games:

  • PRO WX 2100 is 163% faster in 1080p
  • PRO WX 2100 is 150% faster in 1440p
  • PRO WX 2100 is 167% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • PRO WX 2100 is ahead in 51 test (96%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.78 1.63
Recency 4 June 2017 27 March 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 19 Watt

PRO WX 2100 has a 193.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GT 710, on the other hand, has 84.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO WX 2100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 710 is a desktop one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100
NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
GeForce GT 710

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 50 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 4320 votes

Rate GeForce GT 710 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.