AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 4GB VRAM Radeon Pro WX 3100 and 896MB VRAM GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 's Advantages
Released 8 years and 9 months late
Boost Clock1219MHz
More VRAM (4GB vs 896GB)
296 additional rendering cores
Lower TDP (65W vs 182W)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 's Advantages
Larger VRAM bandwidth (111.9GB/s vs 96.00GB/s)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Radeon Pro WX 3100
+132%
1.248 TFLOPS
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
0.536 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jun 2017
Release Date
Sep 2008
Radeon Pro Polaris
Generation
GeForce 200
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 3.0 x8
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
925 MHz
Base Clock
-
1219 MHz
Boost Clock
-
1500 MHz
Memory Clock
999 MHz
Memory
4GB
Memory Size
896MB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR3
128bit
Memory Bus
448bit
96.00GB/s
Bandwidth
111.9GB/s
Render Config
8
Compute Units
-
-
SM Count
27
512
Shading Units
216
32
TMUs
72
16
ROPs
28
-
-
-
-
-
-
16 KB (per CU)
L1 Cache
-
512 KB
L2 Cache
224 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
19.50 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
16.13 GPixel/s
39.01 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
41.47 GTexel/s
1248 GFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
1248 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
536.5 GFLOPS
78.02 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
67.07 GFLOPS
Board Design
65W
TDP
182W
250 W
Suggested PSU
450 W
1x DisplayPort 1.4a
2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
Outputs
2x DVI
1x S-Video
None
Power Connectors
2x 6-pin
Graphics Processor
Lexa
GPU Name
GT200
Lexa XT
GPU Variant
G200-103-A2
GCN 4.0
Architecture
Tesla 2.0
GlobalFoundries
Foundry
TSMC
14 nm
Process Size
65 nm
2.2 billion
Transistors
1.4 billion
103 mm²
Die Size
576 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (12_0)
DirectX
11.1 (10_0)
4.6
OpenGL
3.3
2.1
OpenCL
1.1
1.3
Vulkan
N/A
-
CUDA
1.3
6.7
Shader Model
4.0
