Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs 8065S

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 8065S with Radeon PRO WX 2100, including specs and performance data.

Radeon 8065S
2026
55 Watt
46.41
+925%

8065S outperforms PRO 2100 by a whopping 925% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking85718
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.02
Power efficiency65.7910.09
ArchitectureRDNA 3.5 (2025−2026)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGorgon HaloLexa
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date28 September 2026 (less than a year ago)4 June 2017 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores2560512
Core clock speed1295 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speed3000 MHz1219 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate480.039.01
Floating-point processing powerno data1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs16032
Ray Tracing Cores40no data
L0 Cache1.3 MBno data
L1 Cache1 MB128 KB
L2 Cache2 MB256 KB
L3 Cache32 MBno 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 5.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data48 GB/s
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.86.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.41.2.131

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Radeon 8065S 46.41
+925%
PRO WX 2100 4.53

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.

Radeon 8065S 19454
+923%
Samples: 9
PRO WX 2100 1901
Samples: 295

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

Counter-Strike 2 250−260
+1155%
20−22
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+1156%
9−10
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+1050%
10−11
Resident Evil 4 Remake 130−140
+1800%
7−8

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 140−150
+679%
18−20
Counter-Strike 2 250−260
+1155%
20−22
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+1156%
9−10
Far Cry 5 140−150
+957%
14−16
Fortnite 200−210
+648%
27−30
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+762%
21−24
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+1050%
10−11
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+844%
18−20
Valorant 270−280
+367%
55−60

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 140−150
+679%
18−20
Counter-Strike 2 250−260
+1155%
20−22
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+248%
80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+1156%
9−10
Far Cry 5 140−150
+957%
14−16
Fortnite 200−210
+648%
27−30
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+762%
21−24
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150
+873%
14−16
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+1050%
10−11
Metro Exodus 110−120
+1350%
8−9
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+844%
18−20
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180−190
+1300%
12−14
Valorant 270−280
+367%
55−60

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 140−150
+679%
18−20
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+1156%
9−10
Far Cry 5 140−150
+957%
14−16
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+762%
21−24
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+1050%
10−11
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+844%
18−20
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180−190
+1300%
12−14

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 200−210
+648%
27−30

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+1322%
9−10
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+860%
35−40
Grand Theft Auto V 100−105
+2400%
4−5
Metro Exodus 70−75
+2300%
3−4
Valorant 300−350
+572%
45−50

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+3767%
3−4
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+1867%
3−4
Far Cry 5 110−120
+1363%
8−9
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+1191%
10−12
Hogwarts Legacy 55−60
+1350%
4−5
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95−100
+1533%
6−7

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+1333%
9−10

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+1060%
5−6
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
+588%
16−18
Metro Exodus 45−50
+1025%
4−5
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+7900%
1−2
Valorant 280−290
+1320%
20−22

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+7600%
1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+2600%
1−2
Far Cry 5 65−70
+2133%
3−4
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+1517%
6−7
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+933%
3−4
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+1360%
5−6

4K
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
+1220%
5−6

Full HD
High

Dota 2 40−45 40−45

Full HD
Ultra

Dota 2 40−45 40−45
Valorant 55−60 55−60

1440p
High

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35 30−35

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 14−16 14−16

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 8065S is 7900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 8065S performs better in 55 tests (92%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 46.41 4.53
Recency 28 September 2026 4 June 2017
Chip lithography 4 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 35 Watt

Radeon 8065S has a 925% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 71% more advanced lithography process.

PRO WX 2100, on the other hand, has 36% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 8065S is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 8065S is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation one.

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon 8065S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 62 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 8065S or Radeon PRO WX 2100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.