AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs AMD Radeon HD 6970
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and AMD Radeon HD 6970 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 23% higher boost clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 880 MHz
- 409.7x more texture fill rate: 34.62 GTexel/s vs 84.5 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- 8.5x lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 550 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 2.9x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1375 MHz
- Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 444 vs 429
- Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 25.896 vs 18.676
- Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.503 vs 1.835
- Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.111 vs 52.219
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 14 December 2010 |
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz vs 880 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 34.62 GTexel/s vs 84.5 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt vs 550 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz vs 1375 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 vs 429 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 vs 18.676 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 vs 1.835 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 vs 52.219 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6970
- Around 17% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2836 vs 2428
- 2.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 35739 vs 14535
- Around 89% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 920.398 vs 486.804
- 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 273.175 vs 100.658
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5372 vs 2524
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3716 vs 3274
- 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5372 vs 2524
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3716 vs 3274
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2836 vs 2428 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 35739 vs 14535 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 920.398 vs 486.804 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 273.175 vs 100.658 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5372 vs 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 vs 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5372 vs 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 vs 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3352 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6970
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon HD 6970 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 | 2836 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 | 429 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 | 35739 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | 18.676 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | 920.398 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | 1.835 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 52.219 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 | 273.175 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2524 | 5372 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | 3716 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | 5372 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | 3716 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon HD 6970 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Polaris | TeraScale 3 |
| Code name | Lexa | Cayman |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 14 December 2010 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | $369 |
| Place in performance rating | 812 | 676 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series | |
| Price now | $94.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 48.01 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz | 880 MHz |
| Compute units | 10 | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 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 | 84.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 550 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | 2,640 million |
| Floating-point performance | 2,703.4 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 1536 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Height | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 6.6" (168 mm) | 267 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Bus support | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 11 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 1375 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| CrossFire | ||
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
