Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs TITAN V

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared TITAN V with Radeon PRO WX 2100, including specs and performance data.

TITAN V
2017, $2,999
12 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
41.27
+805%

TITAN V outperforms PRO 2100 by a whopping 805% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking112712
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.121.04
Power efficiency12.7210.04
ArchitectureVolta (2017−2020)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGV100Lexa
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date7 December 2017 (8 years ago)4 June 2017 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,999 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

TITAN V has 296% better value for money than PRO WX 2100.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores5120512
Core clock speed1200 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speed1455 MHz1219 MHz
Number of transistors21,100 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate465.639.01
Floating-point processing power14.9 TFLOPS1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs9616
TMUs32032
Tensor Cores640no data
L1 Cache7.5 MB128 KB
L2 Cache4.5 MB256 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length267 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB2 GB
Memory bus width3072 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed848 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth651.3 GB/s48 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA7.0-
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.

TITAN V 41.27
+805%
PRO WX 2100 4.56

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.

TITAN V 17125
+804%
Samples: 139
PRO WX 2100 1894
Samples: 271

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:

1440p152
+850%
16−18
−850%
4K82
+811%
9−10
−811%

Cost per frame, $

1440p19.73
−112%
9.31
+112%
4K36.57
−121%
16.56
+121%
  • PRO WX 2100 has 112% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • PRO WX 2100 has 121% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how TITAN V and PRO WX 2100 compete in popular games:

  • TITAN V is 850% faster in 1440p
  • TITAN V is 811% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 41.27 4.56
Recency 7 December 2017 4 June 2017
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 35 Watt

TITAN V has a 805% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 17% more advanced lithography process.

PRO WX 2100, on the other hand, has 614% lower power consumption.

The TITAN V is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 2100 in performance tests.

Be aware that TITAN V is a desktop graphics card while Radeon PRO WX 2100 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.

Community ratings

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


2 3352 votes

Rate TITAN V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 58 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about TITAN V or Radeon PRO WX 2100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.