Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs Pro WX Vega M GL
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL with Radeon AI PRO R9700, including specs and performance data.
AI PRO R9700 outperforms Pro M GL by a whopping 582% 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 | 444 | 13 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 13.49 | 19.94 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | RDNA 4.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 22 | Navi 48 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 24 April 2018 (7 years ago) | 23 July 2025 (less than a year ago) |
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 | 1280 | 4096 |
| Core clock speed | 931 MHz | 1660 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz | 2920 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 53,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 80.88 | 747.5 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.588 TFLOPS | 47.84 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 128 |
| TMUs | 80 | 256 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 64 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 1 MB |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 8 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 64 MB |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-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 type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 32 GB |
| Memory bus width | 1024 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 2518 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 644.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 | 52
−573%
| 350−400
+573%
|
| 4K | 18
−567%
| 120−130
+567%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
−525%
|
400−450
+525%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−567%
|
160−170
+567%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−567%
|
140−150
+567%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
−488%
|
300−310
+488%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
−525%
|
400−450
+525%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−567%
|
160−170
+567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−558%
|
250−260
+558%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
−552%
|
450−500
+552%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
−500%
|
300−310
+500%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
−567%
|
240−250
+567%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−567%
|
140−150
+567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−567%
|
280−290
+567%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−567%
|
700−750
+567%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
−488%
|
300−310
+488%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
−525%
|
400−450
+525%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
−555%
|
1100−1150
+555%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−567%
|
160−170
+567%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
−525%
|
500−550
+525%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−558%
|
250−260
+558%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
−552%
|
450−500
+552%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
−500%
|
300−310
+500%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
−567%
|
240−250
+567%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
−582%
|
300−310
+582%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−567%
|
140−150
+567%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
−567%
|
160−170
+567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−567%
|
280−290
+567%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 44
−582%
|
300−310
+582%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−567%
|
700−750
+567%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
−488%
|
300−310
+488%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−567%
|
160−170
+567%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
−525%
|
500−550
+525%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−558%
|
250−260
+558%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
−500%
|
300−310
+500%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−567%
|
140−150
+567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−567%
|
280−290
+567%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24
−567%
|
160−170
+567%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−567%
|
700−750
+567%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 65−70
−552%
|
450−500
+552%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−582%
|
150−160
+582%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
−582%
|
600−650
+582%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
−567%
|
120−130
+567%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
−579%
|
95−100
+579%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
−582%
|
600−650
+582%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
−580%
|
850−900
+580%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−577%
|
210−220
+577%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−550%
|
65−70
+550%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−580%
|
170−180
+580%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
−579%
|
190−200
+579%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
−554%
|
85−90
+554%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−547%
|
110−120
+547%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 24−27
−580%
|
170−180
+580%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−543%
|
45−50
+543%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
−552%
|
150−160
+552%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−567%
|
40−45
+567%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
−525%
|
50−55
+525%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 15
−567%
|
100−105
+567%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−535%
|
400−450
+535%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
−525%
|
100−105
+525%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−543%
|
45−50
+543%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−575%
|
27−30
+575%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
−574%
|
290−300
+574%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
−567%
|
80−85
+567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
−550%
|
130−140
+550%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−567%
|
40−45
+567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−582%
|
75−80
+582%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−12
−582%
|
75−80
+582%
|
This is how Pro WX Vega M GL and AI PRO R9700 compete in popular games:
- AI PRO R9700 is 573% faster in 1080p
- AI PRO R9700 is 567% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.89 | 74.31 |
| Recency | 24 April 2018 | 23 July 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 32 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 300 Watt |
Pro WX Vega M GL has 361.5% lower power consumption.
AI PRO R9700, on the other hand, has a 582.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon AI PRO R9700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon AI PRO R9700 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
