Quadro P4000 Mobile vs Radeon Pro WX 7100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro WX 7100 with Quadro P4000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
P4000 Mobile outperforms Pro WX 7100 by a minimal 1% 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 | 288 | 285 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.15 | 8.18 |
| Power efficiency | 10.64 | 14.03 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Ellesmere | GP104 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 10 November 2016 (8 years ago) | 11 January 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | $819.61 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Pro WX 7100 and P4000 Mobile have a nearly equal value for money.
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 | 2304 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 1188 MHz | 1227 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1243 MHz | 1228 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 179.0 | 137.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 5.728 TFLOPS | 4.398 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 |
| TMUs | 144 | 112 |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 241 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 192 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 | 4x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Display Port | no data | 1.4 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
| Optimus | - | + |
| 3D Stereo | no data | + |
| Mosaic | no data | + |
| nView Display Management | no data | + |
| Optimus | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 6.1 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
−0.9%
|
110−120
+0.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
−1.3%
|
80−85
+1.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
−0.9%
|
110−120
+0.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+1%
|
100−105
−1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+4%
|
75−80
−4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+1.7%
|
60−65
−1.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
+2.9%
|
70−75
−2.9%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
+2.1%
|
140−150
−2.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
−1.3%
|
80−85
+1.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
−0.9%
|
110−120
+0.9%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+1%
|
100−105
−1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+4%
|
75−80
−4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+1.7%
|
60−65
−1.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+1.4%
|
70−75
−1.4%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
+2.9%
|
70−75
−2.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
+2.1%
|
140−150
−2.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
−1.3%
|
80−85
+1.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+4%
|
75−80
−4%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
+2.9%
|
70−75
−2.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
+2.1%
|
140−150
−2.1%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 100−110
+1%
|
100−105
−1%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 130−140
−1.4%
|
140−150
+1.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+10%
|
30−33
−10%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 170−180
−0.6%
|
180−190
+0.6%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+8%
|
50−55
−8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+7.5%
|
40−45
−7.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+6.7%
|
45−50
−6.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 40−45
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+10%
|
30−33
−10%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.55 | 18.82 |
| Recency | 10 November 2016 | 11 January 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 100 Watt |
Pro WX 7100 has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.
P4000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 1.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and 30% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro WX 7100 and Quadro P4000 Mobile.
Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 7100 is a workstation card while Quadro P4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
