Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs GRID M40

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M40 and Radeon Pro WX 3200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GRID M40
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
4.10

Pro WX 3200 outperforms GRID M40 by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking686597
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data12.93
Power efficiency6.016.59
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Polaris 23
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date18 May 2016 (8 years ago)2 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores384640
Core clock speed1033 MHz1082 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate33.0634.62
Floating-point processing power0.7933 TFLOPS1.385 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Width2-slotMXM Module
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s64 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.0-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD12−14
−58.3%
19
+58.3%
4K5−6
−60%
8
+60%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data10.47
4Kno data24.88

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 49
+0%
49
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 10
+0%
10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Far Cry 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how GRID M40 and Pro WX 3200 compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 3200 is 58% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 3200 is 60% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.10 5.85
Recency 18 May 2016 2 July 2019
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 65 Watt

GRID M40 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 30% lower power consumption.

Pro WX 3200, on the other hand, has a 42.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M40 in performance tests.

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.


NVIDIA GRID M40
GRID M40
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
Radeon Pro WX 3200

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 8 votes

Rate GRID M40 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 85 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GRID M40 or Radeon Pro WX 3200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.