Radeon RX 6400 vs FirePro A320

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated276
Place by popularitynot in top-100100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data53.17
Power efficiencyno data25.75
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTrinity GLNavi 24
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date6 June 2012 (12 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384768
Core clock speed800 MHz1923 MHz
Boost clock speed955 MHz2321 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt53 Watt
Texture fill rate22.92111.4
Floating-point processing power0.7334 TFLOPS3.565 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2448
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.2
VulkanN/A1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 June 2012 19 January 2022
Chip lithography 32 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 53 Watt

RX 6400 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 433.3% more advanced lithography process, and 88.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro A320 and Radeon RX 6400. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FirePro A320 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6400 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro A320
FirePro A320
AMD Radeon RX 6400
Radeon RX 6400

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3 2 votes

Rate FirePro A320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1859 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.