Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs Quadro FX 3000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated142
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data26.66
Power efficiencyno data11.23
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameNV35Vega 10
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2003 (21 year ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$203 $999

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 coresno data3584
Core clock speed400 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors135 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data230 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200336.0
Floating-point processing powerno data10.75 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8224

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).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x Molex1x 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 typeDDRHBM2
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed425 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video4x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.1.125

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


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.

FX 3000 69
Pro WX 8200 13581
+19583%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 July 2003 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm

Pro WX 8200 has an age advantage of 15 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 3000 and Radeon Pro WX 8200. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000
Quadro FX 3000
AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Radeon Pro WX 8200

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.


3.8 8 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 27 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 8200 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.