Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 with Radeon Pro WX 3200, including specs and performance data.

R9 285
2014, $249
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.96
+203%

R9 285 outperforms Pro 3200 by a whopping 203% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking364660
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.663.59
Power efficiency6.466.22
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTongaPolaris 23
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)2 July 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

R9 285 has 113% better value for money than Pro WX 3200.

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 cores1792640
Core clock speed918 MHz1082 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate102.834.62
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPS1.385 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs11232
L1 Cache448 KB160 KB
L2 Cache512 KB512 KB

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 x8
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotMXM Module
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/s64 GB/s
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.24x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.0
Vulkan1.2.1701.2.131

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.

R9 285 15.96
+203%
Pro WX 3200 5.26

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.

R9 285 6680
+203%
Pro WX 3200 2203
Samples: 50

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.

R9 285 8570
+172%
Pro WX 3200 3156

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 HD55−60
+189%
19
−189%
4K24−27
+200%
8
−200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.53
+131%
10.47
−131%
4K10.38
+140%
24.88
−140%
  • R9 285 has 131% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 285 has 140% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 49
+0%
49
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 10
+0%
10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Far Cry 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how R9 285 and Pro WX 3200 compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 189% faster in 1080p
  • R9 285 is 200% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.96 5.26
Recency 2 September 2014 2 July 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 65 Watt

R9 285 has a 203.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Pro WX 3200, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 192.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 3200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 285 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a workstation 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 R9 285
Radeon R9 285
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
Radeon Pro WX 3200

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 80 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 89 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 285 or Radeon Pro WX 3200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.