AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs AMD Radeon R7 A360
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and AMD Radeon R7 A360 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 4 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 28% higher core clock speed: 925 MHz vs 725 MHz
- Around 31% higher boost clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 825 MHz
- 1282.2x more texture fill rate: 34.62 GTexel/s vs 27 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 2.2x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- 4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2428 vs 608
- Around 99% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 444 vs 223
- 2.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14535 vs 5809
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3274 vs 1616
- Around 97% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 vs 1704
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3274 vs 1616
- Around 97% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 vs 1704
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 5 May 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz vs 725 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz vs 825 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 34.62 GTexel/s vs 27 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 vs 608 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 vs 223 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 vs 5809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 vs 1616 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 vs 1704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 vs 1616 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 vs 1704 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 A360
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon R7 A360 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 | 608 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 | 223 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 | 5809 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2524 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | 1616 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 1704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | 1616 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 1704 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon R7 A360 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Polaris | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Lexa | Opal |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 5 May 2015 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Place in performance rating | 812 | 1160 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz | 825 MHz |
| Compute units | 10 | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 725 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 | 27 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | 1,040 million |
| Floating-point performance | 864.0 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 384 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Height | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | 6.6" (168 mm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 14.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
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
