Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs GeForce 315 OEM
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 210 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 7.99 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 10.07 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | GT216 | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 31 March 2010 (15 years ago) | 13 August 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 48 | 3584 |
| Core clock speed | 475 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 486 million | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 230 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 7.600 | 336.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1056 TFLOPS | 10.75 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 64 |
| TMUs | 16 | 224 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 896 KB |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | 4 MB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
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 type | DDR3 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 790 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.64 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.125 |
| CUDA | 1.2 | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 31 March 2010 | 13 August 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 230 Watt |
315 OEM has 597% lower power consumption.
Pro WX 8200, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce 315 OEM and Radeon Pro WX 8200. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce 315 OEM is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Pro WX 8200 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
