ATI Radeon HD 4350 vs Pro WX 5100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro WX 5100 with Radeon HD 4350, including specs and performance data.
Pro 5100 outperforms HD 4350 by a whopping 3251% 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 | 421 | 1328 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.57 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.38 | 1.50 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Ellesmere | RV710 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 November 2016 (9 years ago) | 30 September 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 1792 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 713 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1086 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 242 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 20 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 121.6 | 4.800 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.892 TFLOPS | 0.096 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 4 |
| TMUs | 112 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | 448 KB | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 64 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 2.0 x16 |
| 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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 6.4 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 | 4x DisplayPort | 2x DisplayPort |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
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.
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 | 230−240
+3186%
| 7
−3186%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.17 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how Pro WX 5100 and ATI HD 4350 compete in popular games:
- Pro WX 5100 is 3186% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 31 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.07 | 0.39 |
| Recency | 18 November 2016 | 30 September 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 20 Watt |
Pro WX 5100 has a 3251.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.
ATI HD 4350, on the other hand, has 275% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Pro WX 5100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4350 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 5100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 4350 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.
