Arc A310 vs Radeon Pro WX 5100
Arc A310
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro WX 5100
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Arc A310
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro WX 5100
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc A310 is significantly newer (2022 vs 2016). The Arc A310 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score and 97.6% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Arc A310.
| Insight | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) |
| Longevity | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) (6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+97.6%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Arc A310 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $100 versus $120 for the Radeon Pro WX 5100, it costs 17% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 18.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+18.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($100) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Arc A310 and Radeon Pro WX 5100
Arc A310
The Arc A310 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in October 12 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2000 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,438 points.
Radeon Pro WX 5100
The Radeon Pro WX 5100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 18 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 713 MHz to 1086 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,500 points. Launch price was $499.
Graphics Performance
The Arc A310 scores 5,438 and the Radeon Pro WX 5100 reaches 5,500 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc A310 is built on Generation 12.7 while the Radeon Pro WX 5100 uses GCN 4.0, both on 6 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 768 (Arc A310) vs 1,792 (Radeon Pro WX 5100). Raw compute: 3.072 TFLOPS (Arc A310) vs 3.892 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 5100). Boost clocks: 2000 MHz vs 1086 MHz.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,438 | 5,500+1% |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1792+133% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.072 TFLOPS | 3.892 TFLOPS+27% |
| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz+84% | 1086 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 112+250% |
| L1 Cache | 1.1 MB+150% | 0.44 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+100% | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | XeSS | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Arc A310 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro WX 5100 has 8 GB. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 offers 97.6% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Arc A310) vs 2 MB (Radeon Pro WX 5100) — the Arc A310 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 7.906 GB+98% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+100% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Arc A310) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 5100). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc A310) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro WX 5100). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 (Arc A310) vs H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro WX 5100).
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Xe Media Engine | VCE 3.4 |
| Decoder | Xe Media Engine | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Arc A310 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro WX 5100's 75W — a 0% difference. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (Arc A310) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 5100). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 169mm vs 173mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 82°C.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 169mm | 173mm |
| Height | 69mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-21% | 82°C |
| Perf/Watt | 72.5 | 73.3+1% |
Value Analysis
The Arc A310 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the Radeon Pro WX 5100 launched at $499 and now averages $120. The Arc A310 costs 16.7% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 54.4 (Arc A310) vs 45.8 (Radeon Pro WX 5100) — the Arc A310 offers 18.8% better value. The Arc A310 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2016).
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-80% | $499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $100-17% | $120 |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.4+19% | 45.8 |
| Codename | DG2-128 | Ellesmere |
| Release | October 12 2022 | November 18 2016 |
| Ranking | #422 | #416 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Arc A310 and Radeon Pro WX 5100
