NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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 NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q

• Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
• 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 230 Watt
• Around 29% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 220.867 vs 171.616

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200

• 2x more core clock speed: 1200 MHz vs 600 MHz
• Around 26% higher boost clock speed: 1530 MHz vs 1215 MHz
• Around 59% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 13047 vs 8202
• 2.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 769 vs 332
• Around 2% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 69530 vs 68305
• Around 97% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 4031.404 vs 2046.214
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.925 vs 16.026
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 247.788 vs 94.532
• Around 85% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1195.863 vs 645.647
• Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13044 vs 10140
• Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7164 vs 3706
• 9.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 30936 vs 3351
• Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13044 vs 10140
• Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7164 vs 3706
• 9.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 30936 vs 3351

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	8202 13047
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	332 769
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	68305 69530
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	220.867 171.616
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2046.214 4031.404
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	16.026 16.925
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	94.532 247.788
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	645.647 1195.863
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10140 13044
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3706 7164
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3351 30936
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10140 13044
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3706 7164
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3351 30936

Compare specifications (specs)