AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 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
- 3.1x more core clock speed: 925 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 41% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2428 vs 1727
- Around 14% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 444 vs 389
- 2.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14535 vs 6387
- Around 84% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3274 vs 1780
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 vs 2992
- Around 84% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3274 vs 1780
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 vs 2992
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 vs 1727 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 vs 389 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 vs 6387 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 vs 1780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 vs 2992 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 vs 1780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 vs 2992 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 month(s) later
- Around 6% higher boost clock speed: 1150 MHz vs 1082 MHz
- 4.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2792 vs 2524
- Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2792 vs 2524
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 10 July 2019 vs 27 May 2019 |
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz vs 1082 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 65 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2792 vs 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2792 vs 2524 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 | 1727 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 | 389 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 | 6387 |
| 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 | 2792 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | 1780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 2992 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | 2792 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | 1780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 2992 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Polaris | Intel Gen. 9.5 (Coffee Lake) |
| Code name | Lexa | Kaby Lake GT3e |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 10 July 2019 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Place in performance rating | 812 | 813 |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1082 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Compute units | 10 | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 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 | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2200 million | |
| Pipelines | 48 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Yes | |
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Height | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
| Length | 6.6" (168 mm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3/DDR4 |
| Shared memory | Yes | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| H265/HEVC Decode | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
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
