Radeon Pro WX 4130 vs E8950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
E8950 R9 M295X R9 M295X Mac Edition R9 M390X R9 M395X R9 M395X Mac Edition R9 M485X
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Pro 555 Pro 555X Pro 560 Pro 560X Pro 570 Pro 570X Pro 575X Pro 580 Pro 580X Pro WX 3200 Pro WX 4130 Pro WX 4150

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon E8950 with Radeon Pro WX 4130, including specs and performance data.

Radeon E8950
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 95 Watt
12.99
+189%

E8950 outperforms Pro 4130 by a whopping 189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
Pro WX 4130 Pro WX 4130

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking419697
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.556.94
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameAmethystBaffin
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date29 September 2015 (10 years ago)1 March 2017 (8 years ago)

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 cores2048640
Core clock speed735 MHz1002 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1053 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate128.042.12
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS1.348 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12840
L1 Cache512 KB160 KB
L2 Cache512 KB1024 KB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s96 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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 (12_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

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 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 12.99 4.50
Recency 29 September 2015 1 March 2017
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon E8950 has a 188.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro WX 4130, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 90% lower power consumption.

The Radeon E8950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 4130 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon E8950 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro WX 4130 is a mobile workstation one.

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 E8950
Radeon E8950
AMD Radeon Pro WX 4130
Radeon Pro WX 4130
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Arc A350M Arc A350M
Pro WX 4130 Radeon Pro WX 4130
vs
FirePro M5100 FirePro M5100
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Apple M1 8-Core GPU M1 8 Core GPU
R7 M465X AMD R7 M465X
vs
RTX A5500 A5500
Radeon E6465 Radeon E6465
vs
Pro 575X 575X
Radeon E6465 Radeon E6465
vs
RX 7600M XT 7600M XT
Radeon E6465 Radeon E6465
vs
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 9060 XT 16 GB
Radeon E6465 Radeon E6465
vs
AI PRO R9700 R9700
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
GTX 1070 GDDR5X 1070 GDDR5X
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Apple M1 GPU GPU
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Arc A550M A550M
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Arc A770M A770M
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Arc A730M A730M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

4.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon E8950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 35 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 4130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon E8950 or Radeon Pro WX 4130, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.