Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 1080 Ti
2017
11 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
48.01
+913%

GeForce GTX 1080 Ti outperforms Radeon PRO WX 2100 by a whopping 913% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking59613
Place by popularity51not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation27.362.95
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code nameGP102Polaris 12
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date28 February 2017 (7 years ago)21 March 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 $149
Current price$321 (0.5x MSRP)$343 (2.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1080 Ti has 827% better value for money than PRO WX 2100.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3584512
Core clock speed1481 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1600 MHz1219 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature91 °Cno data
Texture fill rate354.439.01
Floating-point performance11,340 gflops1,248 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and Radeon PRO WX 2100 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length10.5" (26.7 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR5XGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount11 GB2 GB
Memory bus width352 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed11000 MHz6000 MHz
Memory bandwidth484.4 GB/s48 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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+no data
G-SYNC support+no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSyncno data+
GPU Boost3.0no data
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTX 1080 Ti 48.01
+913%
PRO WX 2100 4.74

GeForce GTX 1080 Ti outperforms Radeon PRO WX 2100 by 913% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 1080 Ti 18561
+912%
PRO WX 2100 1834

GeForce GTX 1080 Ti outperforms Radeon PRO WX 2100 by 912% in Passmark.

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 HD128
+967%
12−14
−967%
1440p87
+988%
8−9
−988%
4K70
+1067%
6−7
−1067%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+1000%
8−9
−1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100
+1011%
9−10
−1011%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85
+1975%
4−5
−1975%
Battlefield 5 162
+1250%
12−14
−1250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110
+950%
10−11
−950%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+1000%
8−9
−1000%
Far Cry 5 122
+663%
16−18
−663%
Far Cry New Dawn 110−120
+927%
10−12
−927%
Forza Horizon 4 147
+765%
16−18
−765%
Hitman 3 110−120
+973%
10−12
−973%
Horizon Zero Dawn 213
+965%
20−22
−965%
Metro Exodus 144
+1340%
10−11
−1340%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+723%
12−14
−723%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 247
+1444%
16−18
−1444%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1143%
7−8
−1143%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 90
+900%
9−10
−900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85
+1975%
4−5
−1975%
Battlefield 5 147
+1125%
12−14
−1125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110
+950%
10−11
−950%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+1000%
8−9
−1000%
Far Cry 5 86
+438%
16−18
−438%
Far Cry New Dawn 110
+900%
10−12
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 145
+753%
16−18
−753%
Hitman 3 110−120
+973%
10−12
−973%
Horizon Zero Dawn 207
+935%
20−22
−935%
Metro Exodus 102
+920%
10−11
−920%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+723%
12−14
−723%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 153
+856%
16−18
−856%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130
+1190%
10−11
−1190%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1143%
7−8
−1143%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 71
+689%
9−10
−689%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85
+1975%
4−5
−1975%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 81
+710%
10−11
−710%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+1000%
8−9
−1000%
Far Cry 5 73
+356%
16−18
−356%
Forza Horizon 4 120
+606%
16−18
−606%
Horizon Zero Dawn 153
+665%
20−22
−665%
Metro Exodus 94
+840%
10−11
−840%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 98
+880%
10−11
−880%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1143%
7−8
−1143%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 121
+831%
12−14
−831%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 108
+1100%
9−10
−1100%
Far Cry New Dawn 112
+1767%
6−7
−1767%
Hitman 3 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Red Dead Redemption 2 41
+1267%
3−4
−1267%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62
+1967%
3−4
−1967%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 78
+1014%
7−8
−1014%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+2000%
2−3
−2000%
Far Cry 5 97
+1286%
7−8
−1286%
Forza Horizon 4 102
+1175%
8−9
−1175%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
+973%
10−12
−973%
Metro Exodus 88
+4300%
2−3
−4300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 123
+925%
12−14
−925%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+1775%
4−5
−1775%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+2200%
2−3
−2200%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 72
+454%
12−14
−454%
Far Cry New Dawn 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Hitman 3 40−45
+3900%
1−2
−3900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+1200%
5−6
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 41
+4000%
1−2
−4000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40
+1900%
2−3
−1900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Battlefield 5 70
+1067%
6−7
−1067%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 53
+2550%
2−3
−2550%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 75
+1775%
4−5
−1775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 72
+1340%
5−6
−1340%
Metro Exodus 57
+850%
6−7
−850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 49
+880%
5−6
−880%

This is how GTX 1080 Ti and PRO WX 2100 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1080 Ti is 967% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1080 Ti is 988% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1080 Ti is 1067% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1080 Ti is 4300% faster than the PRO WX 2100.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 1080 Ti surpassed PRO WX 2100 in all 67 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 48.01 4.74
Recency 28 February 2017 21 March 2018
Cost $699 $149
Maximum RAM amount 11 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 50 Watt

The GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is a desktop card while Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a mobile workstation 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100

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.


4.3 8398 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1080 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 33 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 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.