Radeon RX Vega 5 vs PRO WX 2100

Place in the ranking	644	652
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.83	no data
Power efficiency	9.42	21.34
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code name	Lexa	Vega
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	4 June 2017 (7 years ago)	7 January 2020 (5 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 cores	512	320
Core clock speed	925 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1219 MHz	1400 MHz
Number of transistors	2,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	39.01	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.248 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	32	no 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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	no data
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	48 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12_1
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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 HD

18−20

−5.6%

19
+5.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

8.28

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +71.4%	7 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +11.1%	9 −11.1%
Elden Ring	12−14 +9.1%	11 −9.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −5%	21 +5%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −20%	18 +20%
Valorant	10−12 −63.6%	18 +63.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Dota 2	14−16 −40%	21 +40%
Elden Ring	12−14 +100%	6 −100%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +14.3%	21 −14.3%
Fortnite	27−30 +3.7%	27−30 −3.7%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +17.6%	17 −17.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +15.4%	13 −15.4%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	41 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +275%	4 −275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Valorant	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
World of Tanks	75−80 +58%	50 −58%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Dota 2	14−16 −147%	37 +147%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +4.3%	21−24 −4.3%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +42.9%	14 −42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +2.5%	40−45 −2.5%
Valorant	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Elden Ring	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +3.2%	30−35 −3.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
World of Tanks	30−35 +3%	30−35 −3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

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	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +7.7%	12−14 −7.7%
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 +0%	5−6 +0%
Fortnite	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Valorant	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and RX Vega 5 compete in popular games:

RX Vega 5 is 6% faster in 1080p

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

in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 275% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega 5 is 147% faster.

All in all, in popular games: