UHD Graphics 770 vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

Place in the ranking	647	587
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.79	no data
Power efficiency	9.46	28.36
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Generation 12.2 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	Lexa	Raptor Lake GT1
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	4 June 2017 (7 years ago)	27 September 2022 (2 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	256
Core clock speed	925 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	1219 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	2,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	39.01	26.40
Floating-point processing power	1.248 TFLOPS	0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	32	16

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	Ring Bus
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	IGP
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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	System Shared
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

Motherboard Dependent

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 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

PRO WX 2100 4.75

UHD Graphics 770 6.10
+28.4%

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 1850
+82.1%

UHD Graphics 770 1016

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	14−16 −35.7%	19 +35.7%
4K	10−12 −40%	14 +40%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	10.64	no data
4K	14.90	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −20%	12 +20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +57.1%	7 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −9.5%	23 +9.5%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10 −44.4%	12−14 +44.4%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Valorant	12−14 −23.1%	16 +23.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +83.3%	6 −83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Dota 2	16−18 −25%	20 +25%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −25%	30 +25%
Fortnite	27−30 −28.6%	35−40 +28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +16.7%	18 −16.7%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10 −44.4%	12−14 +44.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +77.8%	9 −77.8%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −24.4%	50−55 +24.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −18.8%	18−20 +18.8%
Valorant	12−14 −53.8%	20−22 +53.8%
World of Tanks	75−80 −22.8%	95−100 +22.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +120%	5 −120%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Dota 2	16−18 −150%	40 +150%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −16.7%	27−30 +16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +31.3%	16 −31.3%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10 −44.4%	12−14 +44.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −24.4%	50−55 +24.4%
Valorant	12−14 −53.8%	20−22 +53.8%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Grand Theft Auto V	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 −16.1%	35−40 +16.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
World of Tanks	30−35 −32.4%	45−50 +32.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 −50%	9−10 +50%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Valorant	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −6.3%	16−18 +6.3%
Metro Exodus	0−1	2−3
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −28.6%	18−20 +28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −6.3%	16−18 +6.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +21.4%	14 −21.4%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Fortnite	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Valorant	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and UHD Graphics 770 compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics 770 is 36% faster in 1080p
UHD Graphics 770 is 40% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 120% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics 770 is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

PRO WX 2100 is ahead in 8 tests (13%)
UHD Graphics 770 is ahead in 49 tests (79%)
there's a draw in 5 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.75	6.10
Recency	4 June 2017	27 September 2022
Chip lithography	14 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	15 Watt

UHD Graphics 770 has a 28.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 770 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.