AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM 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 3% higher boost clock speed: 1082 MHz vs 1050 MHz
• 686.9x more texture fill rate: 34.62 GTexel/s vs 50.4 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 31% lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 85 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 2% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14535 vs 14269

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM

• Around 8% higher core clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 925 MHz
• Around 63% higher memory clock speed: 6500 MHz vs 4000 MHz
• Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3032 vs 2428
• Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 460 vs 444
• Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 39.283 vs 25.896
• Around 67% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 815.354 vs 486.804
• Around 37% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.437 vs 2.503
• Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 63.718 vs 53.111
• Around 70% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 171.258 vs 100.658
• Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4468 vs 2524
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3667 vs 3274
• Around 77% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4468 vs 2524
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3667 vs 3274

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2428 3032
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	444 460
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	14535 14269
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	25.896 39.283
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	486.804 815.354
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.503 3.437
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	53.111 63.718
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	100.658 171.258
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2524 4468
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3274 3667
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3352 3340
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2524 4468
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3274 3667
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3352 3340

Compare specifications (specs)