GeForce GT 650M SLI vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with GeForce GT 650M SLI, including specs and performance data.

PRO WX 2100
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
4.79

GT 650M SLI outperforms PRO WX 2100 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking644630
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.76no data
Power efficiency9.42no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameLexaN13E-GE
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)22 March 2012 (12 years 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 MHz790 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHz835 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Wattno data
Texture fill rate39.01no data
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no 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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2x2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz4000 MHz
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-DisplayPortno data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA-+

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:

900p70−75
−12.9%
79
+12.9%
Full HD45−50
−8.9%
49
+8.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.31no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Elden Ring 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Elden Ring 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Fortnite 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−4.9%
40−45
+4.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
World of Tanks 75−80
−75.9%
139
+75.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−4.9%
40−45
+4.9%
Valorant 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Elden Ring 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 30−35
−8.8%
35−40
+8.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 1−2
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Valorant 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and GT 650M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GT 650M SLI is 13% faster in 900p
  • GT 650M SLI is 9% faster in 1080p

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

  • in World of Tanks, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 650M SLI is 76% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 650M SLI is ahead in 41 test (68%)
  • there's a draw in 19 tests (32%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.79 5.09
Recency 4 June 2017 22 March 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

PRO WX 2100 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GT 650M SLI, on the other hand, has a 6.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon PRO WX 2100 and GeForce GT 650M SLI.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation card while GeForce GT 650M SLI is a notebook 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
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M SLI
GeForce GT 650M SLI

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.


3.6 50 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 28 votes

Rate GeForce GT 650M SLI 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.