Quadro P3200 vs Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)

Place in the ranking	837	246
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.76	21.13
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Bristol Ridge	GP104
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 June 2016 (8 years ago)	21 February 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 cores	384	1792
Core clock speed	no data	1328 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	1543 MHz
Number of transistors	3100 Million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-45 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	172.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	5.53 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	64
TMUs	no data	112

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 size	medium sized	large
Interface	no data	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	no data	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	no data	6 GB
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	168.3 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 Connectors

no data

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.4
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	1.2.131
CUDA	-	6.1

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. 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.

R5 (Bristol Ridge) 2.43

Quadro P3200 22.74
+836%

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.

R5 (Bristol Ridge) 1720

Quadro P3200 16619
+866%

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.

R5 (Bristol Ridge) 1284

Quadro P3200 12555
+878%

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.

R5 (Bristol Ridge) 8256

Quadro P3200 82507
+899%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R5 (Bristol Ridge) 58018

Quadro P3200 419543
+623%

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	11 −664%	84 +664%
4K	2−3 −1300%	28 +1300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

−640%

35−40
+640%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −713%	65 +713%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2400%	75−80 +2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −683%	45−50 +683%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Far Cry 5	4 −1225%	50−55 +1225%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −1145%	130−140 +1145%
Hitman 3	7−8 −557%	45−50 +557%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −435%	100−110 +435%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −7800%	75−80 +7800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7 −757%	60−65 +757%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −1073%	129 +1073%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −168%	95−100 +168%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −1000%	88 +1000%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −2400%	75−80 +2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −683%	45−50 +683%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1225%	50−55 +1225%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −1145%	130−140 +1145%
Hitman 3	7−8 −557%	45−50 +557%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −435%	100−110 +435%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −7800%	75−80 +7800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −600%	75−80 +600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 −285%	50−55 +285%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −168%	95−100 +168%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −400%	40 +400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −683%	45−50 +683%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1225%	50−55 +1225%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −555%	72 +555%
Hitman 3	7−8 −557%	45−50 +557%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −435%	100−110 +435%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −600%	75−80 +600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −254%	46 +254%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −168%	95−100 +168%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−900%

60−65
+900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −1000%	40−45 +1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −2500%	24−27 +2500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −767%	24−27 +767%
Hitman 3	7−8 −286%	27−30 +286%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −571%	45−50 +571%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −843%	130−140 +843%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−660%

35−40
+660%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	21−24
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	10−11

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−567%

20−22
+567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	28 +0%	28 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

This is how R5 (Bristol Ridge) and Quadro P3200 compete in popular games:

Quadro P3200 is 664% faster in 1080p
Quadro P3200 is 1300% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P3200 is 7800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P3200 is ahead in 56 tests (80%)
there's a draw in 14 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.43	22.74
Recency	1 June 2016	21 February 2018
Chip lithography	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	75 Watt

R5 (Bristol Ridge) has 525% lower power consumption.

Quadro P3200, on the other hand, has a 835.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P3200 is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.