Go ad-free: support us on Patreon
and link your account

Quadro M520 vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
PRO WX 2100 PRO WX 3100 PRO WX 9100
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
M500M M520 M600M M620

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO WX 2100 with Quadro M520, including specs and performance data.

PRO WX 2100
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
4.70

M520 outperforms PRO WX 2100 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
PRO WX 2100 PRO WX 2100
Quadro M520 Quadro M520

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking678674
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.59no data
Power efficiency9.5513.57
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameLexaGM108
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)11 January 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores512384
Core clock speed925 MHz1041 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHz1019 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate39.0116.66
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPS0.7995 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs3216

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 x8MXM-A (3.0)
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth48 GB/s40 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 DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
Optimus-+
3D Stereono data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-5.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

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.

PRO WX 2100 4.70
Quadro M520 4.77
+1.5%

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.

PRO WX 2100 1869
Quadro M520 1898
+1.6%

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 HD18−20
−11.1%
20
+11.1%
4K10−12
−20%
12
+20%

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.28no data
4K14.90no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dead Island 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dead Island 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
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
−1.7%
55−60
+1.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
−1.3%
80−85
+1.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dead Island 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Dota 2 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
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 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
−1.7%
55−60
+1.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dead Island 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Dota 2 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
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
−1.7%
55−60
+1.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%
Valorant 50−55
−2%
50−55
+2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Dead Island 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dead Island 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dead Island 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

This is how PRO WX 2100 and Quadro M520 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M520 is 11% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M520 is 20% faster in 4K

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M520 is 33% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M520 is ahead in 18 tests (29%)
  • there's a draw in 44 tests (71%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.70 4.77
Recency 4 June 2017 11 January 2017
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 25 Watt

PRO WX 2100 has an age advantage of 4 months, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro M520, on the other hand, has a 1.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 40% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon PRO WX 2100 and Quadro M520.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation card while Quadro M520 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 PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100
NVIDIA Quadro M520
Quadro M520
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
vs
Tesla M2070 Tesla M2070
Quadro M520 Quadro M520
vs
Quadro P520 Quadro P520
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
vs
Quadro 5000 Quadro 5000
HD Graphics 4600 HD Graphics 4600
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
HD Graphics 630 HD Graphics 630
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
FirePro W4100 FirePro W4100
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
FirePro W2100 FirePro W2100
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
ATI HD 5770 Radeon HD 5770
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
R5 430 OEM Radeon R5 430 OEM
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
R7 450 OEM Radeon R7 450 OEM
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
R7 240 Radeon R7 240
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
GT 710 GeForce GT 710
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100
GT 730 GeForce GT 730
vs
PRO WX 2100 Radeon PRO WX 2100

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
3.6 32 votes

Rate Quadro M520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO WX 2100 or Quadro M520, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.