GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile vs Radeon Pro WX 8200

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 8200 with GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Pro WX 8200
2018
8 GB HBM2, 230 Watt
28.85
+37.1%

Pro 8200 outperforms RTX 3050 4GB Mobile by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking205284
Place by popularitynot in top-10043
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.08no data
Power efficiency10.1528.40
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameVega 10GN20-P0
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 August 2018 (7 years ago)11 May 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores35842048
Core clock speed1200 MHz1238 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate336.0no data
Floating-point processing power10.75 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs224no data
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache4 MBno data

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_2
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.1.125-

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 HD80−85
+29%
62
−29%
1440p55−60
+27.9%
43
−27.9%
4K35−40
+34.6%
26
−34.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.49no data
1440p18.16no data
4K28.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 170
+0%
170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 66
+0%
66
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 54
+0%
54
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 93
+0%
93
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 125
+0%
125
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+0%
52
+0%
Far Cry 5 68
+0%
68
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 87
+0%
87
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 41
+0%
41
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 89
+0%
89
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+0%
41
+0%
Dota 2 118
+0%
118
+0%
Far Cry 5 64
+0%
64
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 77
+0%
77
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 31
+0%
31
+0%
Metro Exodus 49
+0%
49
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 81
+0%
81
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+0%
34
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Far Cry 5 61
+0%
61
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 19
+0%
19
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+0%
48
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 17
+0%
17
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how Pro WX 8200 and RTX 3050 4GB Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 8200 is 29% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 8200 is 28% faster in 1440p
  • Pro WX 8200 is 35% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.85 21.05
Recency 13 August 2018 11 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 60 Watt

Pro WX 8200 has a 37.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 283.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 8200 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook one.

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.


AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Radeon Pro WX 8200
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

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.


4.2 28 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 1845 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro WX 8200 or GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.