GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB, including specs and performance data.

PRO WX 2100
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
4.79

RTX 3050 8 GB outperforms PRO WX 2100 by a whopping 585% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking644166
Place by popularitynot in top-10011
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.8269.22
Power efficiency9.4417.41
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameLexaGA106
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)4 January 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3050 8 GB has 1712% better value for money than PRO WX 2100.

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 cores5122560
Core clock speed925 MHz1552 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHz1777 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate39.01142.2
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPS9.098 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3280
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
Length168 mm242 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth48 GB/s224.0 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-DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.6

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 4.79
RTX 3050 8 GB 32.80
+585%

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
RTX 3050 8 GB 12612
+585%

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−567%
80−85
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Elden Ring 12−14
−567%
80−85
+567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−579%
95−100
+579%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−567%
80−85
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−550%
130−140
+550%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−582%
75−80
+582%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
Valorant 10−12
−582%
75−80
+582%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−579%
95−100
+579%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−567%
80−85
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Dota 2 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
Elden Ring 12−14
−567%
80−85
+567%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−567%
160−170
+567%
Fortnite 27−30
−579%
190−200
+579%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−550%
130−140
+550%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−582%
75−80
+582%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−583%
280−290
+583%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Valorant 10−12
−582%
75−80
+582%
World of Tanks 75−80
−533%
500−550
+533%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−579%
95−100
+579%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−567%
80−85
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Dota 2 14−16
−567%
100−105
+567%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−567%
160−170
+567%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−550%
130−140
+550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−583%
280−290
+583%
Valorant 10−12
−582%
75−80
+582%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Elden Ring 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−556%
210−220
+556%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%
World of Tanks 30−35
−576%
230−240
+576%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−567%
60−65
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−567%
40−45
+567%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−567%
40−45
+567%
Valorant 12−14
−554%
85−90
+554%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−547%
110−120
+547%
Elden Ring 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−579%
95−100
+579%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Dota 2 16−18
−547%
110−120
+547%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Fortnite 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Valorant 4−5
−575%
27−30
+575%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.79 32.80
Recency 4 June 2017 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 130 Watt

PRO WX 2100 has 271.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 8 GB, on the other hand, has a 584.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB 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 RTX 3050 8 GB
GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB

Other comparisons

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
3.9 13206 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB 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.