Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) vs Pro WX 8200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 8200 with Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), including specs and performance data.

Pro WX 8200
2018, $999
8 GB HBM2, 230 Watt
30.11
+626%

Pro 8200 outperforms 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) by a whopping 626% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking211729
Place by popularitynot in top-10038
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.66no data
Power efficiency10.0721.28
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameVega 10Vega Raven Ridge
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 August 2018 (7 years ago)26 October 2017 (8 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 cores3584512
Core clock speed1200 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate336.057.60
Floating-point processing power10.75 TFLOPS1.843 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs22432
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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width2048 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

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 outputs

API and SDK support

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
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.1251.2

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Pro WX 8200 30.11
+626%
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 4.15

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.

Pro WX 8200 12592
+625%
Samples: 104
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1737
Samples: 29

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 HD130−140
+622%
18
−622%
4K70−75
+600%
10
−600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.68no data
4K14.27no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 11
+0%
11
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Fortnite 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 17
+0%
17
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 42
+0%
42
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Fortnite 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7
+0%
7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Dota 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%
Valorant 15
+0%
15
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 10
+0%
10
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9
+0%
9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how Pro WX 8200 and RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 8200 is 622% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 8200 is 600% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.11 4.15
Recency 13 August 2018 26 October 2017
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 15 Watt

Pro WX 8200 has a 625.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 9 months.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), on the other hand, has 1433.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 8200 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 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
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

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 29 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1825 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 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 Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.