Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs R7 350

Place in the ranking	598	143
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	26.72
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code name	Cape Verde	Vega 10
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	6 July 2016 (8 years ago)	13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	512	3584
Core clock speed	800 MHz	1200 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1500 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	230 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.60	336.0
Floating-point processing power	0.8192 TFLOPS	10.75 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	64
TMUs	32	224

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	168 mm	267 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR5	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	2048 Bit
Memory clock speed	1125 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	512.0 GB/s

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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	4x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.125

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.58	35.21
Recency	6 July 2016	13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	230 Watt

R7 350 has 318.2% lower power consumption.

Pro WX 8200, on the other hand, has a 531% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro WX 8200 is a workstation one.

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