Radeon RX 560 vs PRO WX 9100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon PRO WX 9100 with Radeon RX 560, including specs and performance data.
PRO 9100 outperforms RX 560 by a whopping 222% 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 | 225 | 534 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 73 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.77 | 1.48 |
| Power efficiency | 9.49 | 9.03 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Vega 10 | Polaris 21 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 10 July 2017 (8 years ago) | 18 April 2017 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,599 | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
PRO WX 9100 has 155% better value for money than RX 560.
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 | 4096 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1175 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1275 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 12,500 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 230 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 384.0 | 81.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 12.29 TFLOPS | 2.611 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 16 |
| TMUs | 256 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 1024 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | 267 mm | 170 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 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 | HBM2 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 2048 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 945 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 483.8 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |
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 | 6x mini-DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.125 | 1.2.131 |
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.
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.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
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 | 110−120
+214%
| 35
−214%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 14.54
−414%
| 2.83
+414%
|
- RX 560 has 414% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 28.34 | 8.80 |
| Recency | 10 July 2017 | 18 April 2017 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 4 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 230 Watt | 75 Watt |
PRO WX 9100 has a 222% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RX 560, on the other hand, has 207% lower power consumption.
The Radeon PRO WX 9100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 560 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 9100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 560 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
