Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs Quadro P620

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P620 and Radeon Pro WX 8200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P620
2018
2 GB GDDR5, 40 Watt
8.18

Pro WX 8200 outperforms P620 by a whopping 260% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking479158
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data25.23
Power efficiency16.2710.19
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGP107Vega 10
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 February 2018 (7 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores5123584
Core clock speed1177 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speed1443 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt230 Watt
Texture fill rate46.18336.0
Floating-point processing power1.478 TFLOPS10.75 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs32224

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length145 mm267 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/s512.0 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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.125
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.

Quadro P620 8.18
Pro WX 8200 29.45
+260%

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.

Quadro P620 3659
Pro WX 8200 13169
+260%

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 HD47
−240%
160−170
+240%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.24

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
−241%
75−80
+241%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−240%
160−170
+240%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−233%
60−65
+233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
−241%
75−80
+241%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−240%
160−170
+240%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−233%
60−65
+233%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Fortnite 113
−254%
400−450
+254%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
−252%
95−100
+252%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−244%
110−120
+244%
Valorant 85−90
−245%
300−310
+245%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
−241%
75−80
+241%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−240%
160−170
+240%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
−228%
450−500
+228%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−233%
60−65
+233%
Dota 2 90
−233%
300−310
+233%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Fortnite 42
−257%
150−160
+257%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
−252%
95−100
+252%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−233%
110−120
+233%
Metro Exodus 17
−253%
60−65
+253%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−244%
110−120
+244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
−244%
110−120
+244%
Valorant 85−90
−245%
300−310
+245%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−233%
60−65
+233%
Dota 2 83
−249%
290−300
+249%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−244%
110−120
+244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
−253%
60−65
+253%
Valorant 85−90
−245%
300−310
+245%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 29
−245%
100−105
+245%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−253%
240−250
+253%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−233%
40−45
+233%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−241%
150−160
+241%
Valorant 100−105
−250%
350−400
+250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−257%
75−80
+257%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−242%
65−70
+242%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−257%
75−80
+257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
−242%
65−70
+242%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
−250%
70−75
+250%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−250%
14−16
+250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%
Valorant 45−50
−248%
160−170
+248%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Dota 2 30−35
−244%
110−120
+244%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%

This is how Quadro P620 and Pro WX 8200 compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 8200 is 240% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.18 29.45
Recency 1 February 2018 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 230 Watt

Quadro P620 has 475% lower power consumption.

Pro WX 8200, on the other hand, has a 260% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P620 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 P620
Quadro P620
AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Radeon Pro WX 8200

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.


3.6 645 votes

Rate Quadro P620 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 give us your opinion about Quadro P620 or Radeon Pro WX 8200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.