Radeon 780M vs PRO WX 2100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.

PRO WX 2100
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
4.77

780M outperforms PRO WX 2100 by a whopping 284% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking638298
Place by popularitynot in top-10047
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.08no data
Power efficiency9.4284.33
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameLexaPhoenix
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)6 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores512768
Core clock speed925 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHz2700 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate39.01129.6
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1500 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth48 GB/sno data
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-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

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 Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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 4.77
Radeon 780M 18.30
+284%

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
Radeon 780M 7061
+284%

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 HD9−10
−300%
36
+300%
1440p5−6
−300%
20
+300%
4K3−4
−400%
15
+400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p16.56no data
1440p29.80no data
4K49.67no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−388%
39
+388%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−400%
60−65
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−288%
31
+288%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−330%
40−45
+330%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−283%
110−120
+283%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−190%
90−95
+190%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−473%
60−65
+473%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−253%
60−65
+253%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−93.3%
85−90
+93.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−400%
60−65
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24
+200%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−330%
40−45
+330%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−283%
110−120
+283%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−190%
90−95
+190%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−473%
60−65
+473%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−218%
54
+218%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−147%
40−45
+147%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−93.3%
85−90
+93.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−188%
23
+188%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−330%
40−45
+330%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−283%
110−120
+283%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−71%
53
+71%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−171%
46
+171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−70.6%
29
+70.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+150%
18
−150%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−300%
27−30
+300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−1011%
100−105
+1011%
Hitman 3 9−10
−144%
21−24
+144%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−236%
35−40
+236%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−1600%
30−35
+1600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−400%
20
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−267%
110−120
+267%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Hitman 3 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−1780%
90−95
+1780%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−1800%
18−20
+1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1400%
15
+1400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 3−4
Far Cry 5 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−525%
24−27
+525%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 32
+0%
32
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+0%
17
+0%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 780M is 300% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 780M is 300% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 780M is 400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 150% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 780M is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • PRO WX 2100 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Radeon 780M is ahead in 67 tests (94%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.77 18.30
Recency 4 June 2017 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 283.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M 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 Radeon 780M 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
AMD Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M

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.


3.5 37 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1461 vote

Rate Radeon 780M 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.