Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs HD Graphics P630

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics P630 with Radeon Pro WX 3200, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics P630
2016
1740 MB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
3.10

Pro WX 3200 outperforms HD Graphics P630 by a whopping 102% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking752572
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data12.47
Power efficiency14.316.67
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2Polaris 23
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date5 August 2016 (8 years ago)2 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

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 cores192640
Core clock speed350 MHz1082 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate26.4034.62
Floating-point processing power0.4224 TFLOPS1.385 TFLOPS
ROPs316
TMUs2432

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 x1PCIe 3.0 x8
WidthIGPMXM 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1740 MB4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data64 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

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.0
Vulkan1.1.1031.2.131

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD Graphics P630 3.10
Pro WX 3200 6.26
+102%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

HD Graphics P630 1198
Pro WX 3200 2414
+102%

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 HD9−10
−111%
19
+111%
4K3−4
−167%
8
+167%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data10.47
4Kno data24.88

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−141%
40−45
+141%
Hitman 3 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−65.2%
35−40
+65.2%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−500%
24
+500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−69.2%
21−24
+69.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−30.8%
50−55
+30.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−141%
40−45
+141%
Hitman 3 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−65.2%
35−40
+65.2%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−250%
14
+250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−69.2%
21−24
+69.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−42.9%
20−22
+42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−30.8%
50−55
+30.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−141%
40−45
+141%
Hitman 3 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−65.2%
35−40
+65.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−69.2%
21−24
+69.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+40%
10
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−30.8%
50−55
+30.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Hitman 3 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−111%
40−45
+111%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how HD Graphics P630 and Pro WX 3200 compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 3200 is 111% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 3200 is 167% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics P630 is 40% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Pro WX 3200 is 700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics P630 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Pro WX 3200 is ahead in 61 test (86%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.10 6.26
Recency 5 August 2016 2 July 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1740 MB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

HD Graphics P630 has 333.3% lower power consumption.

Pro WX 3200, on the other hand, has a 101.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 135.4% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics P630 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics P630 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a workstation 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.


Intel HD Graphics P630
HD Graphics P630
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
Radeon Pro WX 3200

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.


2.9 19 votes

Rate HD Graphics P630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 81 vote

Rate Radeon Pro WX 3200 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.