GeForce GTX 670M vs Radeon PRO WX 2100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with GeForce GTX 670M, including specs and performance data.
PRO 2100 outperforms 670M by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 691 | 714 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.95 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.73 | 4.20 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Lexa | GF114 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 June 2017 (8 years ago) | 22 March 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 512 | 336 |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 598 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1219 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,200 million | 1,950 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 39.01 | 33.49 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.248 TFLOPS | 0.8037 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 24 |
| TMUs | 32 | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 448 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 384 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 size | no data | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
| SLI options | - | + |
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 | 1536 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 192bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 48 GB/s | 72.0 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 Connectors | 1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | - | + |
| HDCP | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | Up to 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
| Optimus | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 API |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 40−45
+2.6%
| 39
−2.6%
|
| Full HD | 40−45
−2.5%
| 41
+2.5%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.73 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+3.6%
|
55−60
−3.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 75−80
−15.2%
|
91
+15.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+5.4%
|
35−40
−5.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+3.6%
|
55−60
−3.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+5.4%
|
35−40
−5.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+3.6%
|
55−60
−3.6%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+9.4%
|
30−35
−9.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+3.1%
|
30−35
−3.1%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+11.4%
|
40−45
−11.4%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
This is how PRO WX 2100 and GTX 670M compete in popular games:
- PRO WX 2100 is 3% faster in 900p
- GTX 670M is 3% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 50% faster.
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 670M is 15% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- PRO WX 2100 performs better in 46 tests (78%)
- GTX 670M performs better in 1 test (2%)
- there's a draw in 12 tests (20%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.23 | 3.91 |
| Recency | 4 June 2017 | 22 March 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1536 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 75 Watt |
PRO WX 2100 has a 8.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon PRO WX 2100 and GeForce GTX 670M.
Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 670M is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
