Radeon Pro 5600M vs Quadro P3200

Place in performance ranking	222	211
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	3.59	no data
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Navi / RDNA (2019−2020)
GPU code name	N18E-Q1	Navi 10
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	27 February 2017 (7 years ago)	15 June 2020 (3 years ago)
Current price	$2122	no data

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1792	2560
Core clock speed	708 - 1202 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1228 MHz	1265 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	78 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	172.8	164.8

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro P3200 and Radeon Pro 5600M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	medium sized
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

Memory

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	GDDR5	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	2048 Bit
Memory clock speed	7008 MHz	1540 MBps
Memory bandwidth	168.3 GB/s	394.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors

No outputs

Technologies

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

Optimus

no data

API support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	6.1	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Quadro P3200 23.03

Pro 5600M 24.05
+4.4%

Radeon Pro 5600M outperforms Quadro P3200 by 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Quadro P3200 8919

Pro 5600M 9313
+4.4%

Radeon Pro 5600M outperforms Quadro P3200 by 4% in Passmark.

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 HD	85 +0%	85−90 +0%
4K	28 +3.7%	27−30 −3.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40

−5.4%

35−40
+5.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65 +35.4%	45−50 −35.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 −5%	40−45 +5%
Battlefield 5	75−80 −2.6%	75−80 +2.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 −5%	60−65 +5%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −5.4%	35−40 +5.4%
Far Cry 5	79 +25.4%	60−65 −25.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 −4.9%	60−65 +4.9%
Forza Horizon 4	95 +17.3%	80−85 −17.3%
Hitman 3	65−70 −5.9%	70−75 +5.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −4.1%	50−55 +4.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −2.6%	35−40 +2.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	63 +18.9%	50−55 −18.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −4.5%	45−50 +4.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	56 +16.7%	45−50 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 −5%	40−45 +5%
Battlefield 5	75−80 −2.6%	75−80 +2.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 −5%	60−65 +5%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −5.4%	35−40 +5.4%
Far Cry 5	74 +17.5%	60−65 −17.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 −4.9%	60−65 +4.9%
Forza Horizon 4	88 +8.6%	80−85 −8.6%
Hitman 3	65−70 −5.9%	70−75 +5.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −4.1%	50−55 +4.1%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −2.6%	35−40 +2.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	53 +0%	50−55 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	84 +55.6%	50−55 −55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −4.5%	45−50 +4.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40 −20%	45−50 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 −5%	40−45 +5%
Battlefield 5	75−80 −2.6%	75−80 +2.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −5.4%	35−40 +5.4%
Far Cry 5	70 +11.1%	60−65 −11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 −4.9%	60−65 +4.9%
Forza Horizon 4	72 −12.5%	80−85 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	46 −17.4%	50−55 +17.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −4.5%	45−50 +4.5%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −5.7%	35−40 +5.7%
Hitman 3	35−40 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −3.2%	30−35 +3.2%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −6.7%	30−35 +6.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −4%	24−27 +4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 −9.1%	24−27 +9.1%
Battlefield 5	50−55 −5.9%	50−55 +5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −5.1%	40−45 +5.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 −4.5%	45−50 +4.5%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −4.3%	45−50 +4.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −3.7%	27−30 +3.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −5.6%	18−20 +5.6%
Hitman 3	21−24 −4.5%	21−24 +4.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −6.3%	16−18 +6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	28 +7.7%	24−27 −7.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −3.7%	27−30 +3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −4.5%	21−24 +4.5%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −3%	30−35 +3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%

This is how Quadro P3200 and Pro 5600M compete in popular games:

Pro 5600M is 0% faster than Quadro P3200 in 1080p
Quadro P3200 is 3.7% faster than Pro 5600M in 4K

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P3200 is 55.6% faster than the Pro 5600M.
in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5600M is 20% faster than the Quadro P3200.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P3200 is ahead in 10 tests (15%)
Pro 5600M is ahead in 57 tests (84%)
there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	23.03	24.05
Recency	27 February 2017	15 June 2020
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	78 Watt	50 Watt