Radeon R9 290X vs Pro WX 7100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 7100 with Radeon R9 290X, including specs and performance data.

Pro WX 7100
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 130 Watt
19.87
+5.3%

Pro WX 7100 outperforms R9 290X by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking280299
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.194.82
Power efficiency10.734.57
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameEllesmereHawaii
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date10 November 2016 (8 years ago)24 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 $549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

Pro WX 7100 has 70% better value for money than R9 290X.

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 cores23042816
Core clock speed1188 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1243 MHz947 MHz
Number of transistors5,700 million6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate179.0176.0
Floating-point processing power5.728 TFLOPS5.632 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs144176

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mm275 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s320 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity-+
HDMI-+
DisplayPort support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-+
CrossFire-+
FreeSync++
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
TressFX-+
TrueAudio-+
UVD-+
DDMA audiono data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.131+

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.

Pro WX 7100 19.87
+5.3%
R9 290X 18.87

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 7100 7818
+5.3%
R9 290X 7425

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 HD90−95
+4.7%
86
−4.7%
4K50−55
+0%
50
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.88
−39.1%
6.38
+39.1%
4K15.98
−45.5%
10.98
+45.5%
  • R9 290X has 39% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 290X has 46% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+6.3%
45−50
−6.3%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+6.3%
45−50
−6.3%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+4.8%
60−65
−4.8%
Fortnite 100−110
+4.1%
95−100
−4.1%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+5.4%
70−75
−5.4%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+5.9%
65−70
−5.9%
Valorant 140−150
+3.6%
130−140
−3.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+6.3%
45−50
−6.3%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
−21.7%
280
+21.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Dota 2 100−110
+2.9%
100−110
−2.9%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+4.8%
60−65
−4.8%
Fortnite 100−110
+4.1%
95−100
−4.1%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+5.4%
70−75
−5.4%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+6%
67
−6%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+5.1%
35−40
−5.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+5.9%
65−70
−5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−38.9%
75
+38.9%
Valorant 140−150
+3.6%
130−140
−3.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Dota 2 100−110
−25.9%
136
+25.9%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+4.8%
60−65
−4.8%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+5.4%
70−75
−5.4%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+63.6%
44
−63.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+86.2%
29
−86.2%
Valorant 140−150
+3.6%
130−140
−3.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
+4.1%
95−100
−4.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+4.5%
130−140
−4.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+6.5%
30−35
−6.5%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+1.8%
160−170
−1.8%
Valorant 180−190
+3.4%
170−180
−3.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+5.9%
50−55
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+4.9%
40−45
−4.9%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+6.7%
45−50
−6.7%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+6.9%
27−30
−6.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+7.3%
40−45
−7.3%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
−48.6%
52
+48.6%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+5.9%
100−110
−5.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Dota 2 65−70
−29.2%
84
+29.2%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3.1%
30−35
−3.1%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

This is how Pro WX 7100 and R9 290X compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 7100 is 5% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro WX 7100 is 86% faster.
  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the R9 290X is 49% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro WX 7100 is ahead in 60 tests (90%)
  • R9 290X is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.87 18.87
Recency 10 November 2016 24 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 250 Watt

Pro WX 7100 has a 5.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 92.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro WX 7100 and Radeon R9 290X.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 7100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 290X is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100
Radeon Pro WX 7100
AMD Radeon R9 290X
Radeon R9 290X

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 58 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 7100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 456 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro WX 7100 or Radeon R9 290X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.