Radeon Pro WX 4150 vs GeForce GTX 670

Place in performance ranking	353	531
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.41	0.46
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code name	GK104	Polaris 11
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	10 May 2012 (12 years ago)	1 March 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	no data
Current price	$22 (0.1x MSRP)	$2000

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 670 has 641% better value for money than Pro WX 4150.

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 cores	1344	896
CUDA cores	1344	no data
Core clock speed	915 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	980 MHz	1053 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	97 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	102.5 billion/sec	58.97
Floating-point performance	2,459.5 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 670 and Radeon Pro WX 4150 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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	9.5" (24.1 cm)	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	Two 6-pin	None
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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256-bit GDDR5	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6.0 GB/s	7000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	96 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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 Connectors	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	no data
HDCP	+	no data
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	no data	+
3D Blu-Ray	+	no data
3D Gaming	+	no data
3D Vision	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	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 670 13.80
+106%

Pro WX 4150 6.70

GeForce GTX 670 outperforms Radeon Pro WX 4150 by 106% based on our aggregate 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 670 5331
+106%

Pro WX 4150 2587

GeForce GTX 670 outperforms Radeon Pro WX 4150 by 106% in Passmark.

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

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12

+120%

5−6
−120%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +129%	14−16 −129%
Hitman 3	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +121%	14−16 −121%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +129%	14−16 −129%
Hitman 3	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +121%	14−16 −121%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +129%	14−16 −129%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +121%	14−16 −121%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+125%

8−9
−125%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Hitman 3	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

+140%

5−6
−140%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	13.80	6.70
Recency	10 May 2012	1 March 2017
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	50 Watt