Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL vs Quadro P3000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy
VS
#ad 
Buy

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P3000 Mobile and Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

P3000 Mobile
2017
6 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
14.43
+35.4%

P3000 Mobile outperforms Pro WX Vega M GL by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking339412
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency15.3313.06
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP104Polaris 22
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)24 April 2018 (6 years ago)

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 cores12801280
Core clock speed1088 MHz931 MHz
Boost clock speed1215 MHz1011 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate97.2080.88
Floating-point processing power3.11 TFLOPS2.588 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs8080

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).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)IGP

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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit1024 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth168 GB/s179.2 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 outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.1-

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.

P3000 Mobile 14.43
+35.4%
Pro WX Vega M GL 10.66

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.

P3000 Mobile 6452
+35.3%
Pro WX Vega M GL 4768

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

P3000 Mobile 12105
+20.8%
Pro WX Vega M GL 10020

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

P3000 Mobile 9256
+26.2%
Pro WX Vega M GL 7333

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

P3000 Mobile 63332
+62.4%
Pro WX Vega M GL 38986

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

P3000 Mobile 2864
+38.9%
Pro WX Vega M GL 2062

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 HD64
+23.1%
52
−23.1%
4K28
+55.6%
18
−55.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+41.4%
27−30
−41.4%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+39.1%
60−65
−39.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+41.4%
27−30
−41.4%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+31.4%
50−55
−31.4%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+39.1%
60−65
−39.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+35.9%
35−40
−35.9%
Fortnite 85−90
+27.9%
65−70
−27.9%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+38.9%
35−40
−38.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+38.1%
40−45
−38.1%
Valorant 120−130
+21.2%
100−110
−21.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+41.4%
27−30
−41.4%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+31.4%
50−55
−31.4%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+39.1%
60−65
−39.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+22.8%
160−170
−22.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Dota 2 95−100
+21.5%
75−80
−21.5%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+35.9%
35−40
−35.9%
Fortnite 85−90
+27.9%
65−70
−27.9%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+38.9%
35−40
−38.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+36.4%
40−45
−36.4%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+38.1%
40−45
−38.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63
+43.2%
44
−43.2%
Valorant 120−130
+21.2%
100−110
−21.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+31.4%
50−55
−31.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Dota 2 95−100
+21.5%
75−80
−21.5%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+35.9%
35−40
−35.9%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+38.1%
40−45
−38.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+37.5%
24
−37.5%
Valorant 120−130
+21.2%
100−110
−21.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 85−90
+27.9%
65−70
−27.9%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+31.8%
85−90
−31.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+85.4%
80−85
−85.4%
Valorant 150−160
+25.4%
120−130
−25.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+41.9%
30−35
−41.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+39.3%
27−30
−39.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+26.1%
21−24
−26.1%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+46.7%
15
−46.7%
Valorant 85−90
+40.3%
60−65
−40.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Dota 2 55−60
+33.3%
40−45
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%

This is how P3000 Mobile and Pro WX Vega M GL compete in popular games:

  • P3000 Mobile is 23% faster in 1080p
  • P3000 Mobile is 56% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the P3000 Mobile is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, P3000 Mobile surpassed Pro WX Vega M GL in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.43 10.66
Recency 11 January 2017 24 April 2018
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 65 Watt

P3000 Mobile has a 35.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro WX Vega M GL, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 15.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL 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 Quadro P3000 Mobile
Quadro P3000
AMD Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL
Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL

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.


3.9 163 votes

Rate Quadro P3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P3000 Mobile or Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.