AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs AMD Radeon E8950
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and AMD Radeon E8950 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 26% higher core clock speed: 925 MHz vs 735 MHz
- Around 8% higher boost clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 270.5x more texture fill rate: 34.62 GTexel/s vs 128.0 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 46% lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 95 Watt
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 29 September 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz vs 735 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 34.62 GTexel/s vs 128.0 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt vs 95 Watt |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E8950
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 50% higher memory clock speed: 6000 MHz vs 4000 MHz
- 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 66.837 vs 25.896
- 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1369.722 vs 486.804
- 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.633 vs 2.503
- Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.836 vs 53.111
- 3.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 326.391 vs 100.658
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz vs 4000 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 66.837 vs 25.896 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1369.722 vs 486.804 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.633 vs 2.503 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.836 vs 53.111 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 326.391 vs 100.658 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: AMD Radeon E8950
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon E8950 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | 66.837 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | 1369.722 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | 6.633 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 65.836 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 | 326.391 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2524 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon E8950 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Polaris | GCN 3.0 |
| Code name | Lexa | Amethyst |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 29 September 2015 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Place in performance rating | 812 | 732 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Compute units | 10 | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 735 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 86.56 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1,385 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1,385 GFLOPS | |
| Pixel fill rate | 17.31 GPixel/s | |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Texture fill rate | 34.62 GTexel/s | 128.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | 5,000 million |
| Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 2048 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Height | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 6.6" (168 mm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 192.0 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 6000 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 with others
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 6800 GT
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon PRO WX 2100
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 11
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
IntelIris Plus Graphics 645
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 9
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon RX 640
