Tesla T4 vs Radeon PRO WX 3100

Place in the ranking	565	203
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.01	no data
Power efficiency	7.13	27.52
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Lexa	TU104
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	12 June 2017 (7 years ago)	13 September 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	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	2560
Core clock speed	925 MHz	585 MHz
Boost clock speed	1219 MHz	1590 MHz
Number of transistors	2,200 million	13,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	39.01	254.4
Floating-point processing power	1.248 TFLOPS	8.141 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	64
TMUs	32	160
Tensor Cores	no data	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	40

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	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	145 mm	168 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	320.0 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 Connectors

1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	-	7.5

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 3100 6.72

Tesla T4 27.95
+316%

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 3100 2583

Tesla T4 10744
+316%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

PRO WX 3100 7624

Tesla T4 61276
+704%

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

−285%

50−55
+285%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

15.31

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
Elden Ring	18−20 −295%	75−80 +295%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −307%	110−120 +307%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −312%	70−75 +312%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −295%	75−80 +295%
Valorant	21−24 −313%	95−100 +313%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
Dota 2	21−24 −313%	95−100 +313%
Elden Ring	18−20 −295%	75−80 +295%
Far Cry 5	30−33 −300%	120−130 +300%
Fortnite	25 −300%	100−105 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −307%	110−120 +307%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 −313%	95−100 +313%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −312%	70−75 +312%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 −300%	220−230 +300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −295%	75−80 +295%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Valorant	21−24 −313%	95−100 +313%
World of Tanks	100−110 −285%	400−450 +285%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −305%	85−90 +305%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
Dota 2	21−24 −313%	95−100 +313%
Far Cry 5	30−33 −300%	120−130 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −307%	110−120 +307%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 −300%	220−230 +300%
Valorant	21−24 −313%	95−100 +313%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	7−8 −286%	27−30 +286%
Elden Ring	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −295%	150−160 +295%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
World of Tanks	45−50 −296%	190−200 +296%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −309%	45−50 +309%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −306%	130−140 +306%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −289%	35−40 +289%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −300%	40−45 +300%
Valorant	16−18 −312%	70−75 +312%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	0−1	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 −289%	70−75 +289%
Elden Ring	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −312%	70−75 +312%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 −295%	75−80 +295%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −312%	70−75 +312%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%
Counter-Strike 2	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Dota 2	18−20 −289%	70−75 +289%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
Fortnite	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −286%	27−30 +286%
Valorant	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%

This is how PRO WX 3100 and Tesla T4 compete in popular games:

Tesla T4 is 285% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.72	27.95
Recency	12 June 2017	13 September 2018
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	70 Watt

PRO WX 3100 has 7.7% lower power consumption.

Tesla T4, on the other hand, has a 315.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Tesla T4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 3100 in performance tests.

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