Quadro P3200 Max-Q vs Radeon RX 470

Place in the ranking	272	246
Place by popularity	42	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.84	no data
Power efficiency	12.11	21.72
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Ellesmere	GP104
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	4 August 2016 (8 years ago)	21 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$179	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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	2048	1792
Core clock speed	926 MHz	1139 MHz
Boost clock speed	1206 MHz	1404 MHz
Number of transistors	5,700 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	154.4	157.2
Floating-point processing power	4.94 TFLOPS	5.032 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	128	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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1650 MHz	1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth	211.2 GB/s	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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	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.

RX 470 20.87

P3200 Max-Q 23.40
+12.1%

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.

RX 470 8096

P3200 Max-Q 9077
+12.1%

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	71 −5.6%	75−80 +5.6%
1440p	39 −2.6%	40−45 +2.6%
4K	38 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.52	no data
1440p	4.59	no data
4K	4.71	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −6.1%	70−75 +6.1%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%
Forza Horizon 4	105 −4.8%	110−120 +4.8%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −7.1%	60−65 +7.1%
Metro Exodus	74 −8.1%	80−85 +8.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −4.2%	50−55 +4.2%
Valorant	85−90 −11.8%	95−100 +11.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −6.1%	70−75 +6.1%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%
Dota 2	48 −4.2%	50−55 +4.2%
Far Cry 5	52 −5.8%	55−60 +5.8%
Fortnite	110−120 −9.1%	120−130 +9.1%
Forza Horizon 4	88 −8%	95−100 +8%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −7.1%	60−65 +7.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	73 −9.6%	80−85 +9.6%
Metro Exodus	34 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	71 −5.6%	75−80 +5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −4.2%	50−55 +4.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 −11.9%	75−80 +11.9%
Valorant	85−90 −11.8%	95−100 +11.8%
World of Tanks	230−240 −9.2%	260−270 +9.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −6.1%	70−75 +6.1%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%
Dota 2	70−75 −8.1%	80−85 +8.1%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −8.7%	75−80 +8.7%
Forza Horizon 4	67 −11.9%	75−80 +11.9%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −7.1%	60−65 +7.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	59 −10.2%	65−70 +10.2%
Valorant	85−90 −11.8%	95−100 +11.8%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −9.2%	130−140 +9.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%
World of Tanks	140−150 −5.6%	150−160 +5.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −4.7%	45−50 +4.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −12.1%	65−70 +12.1%
Forza Horizon 4	51 −7.8%	55−60 +7.8%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Metro Exodus	46 −8.7%	50−55 +8.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Valorant	55−60 −9.1%	60−65 +9.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Dota 2	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	62 −4.8%	65−70 +4.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Dota 2	86 −10.5%	95−100 +10.5%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −11.1%	30−33 +11.1%
Fortnite	25 −8%	27−30 +8%
Forza Horizon 4	25 −8%	27−30 +8%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Valorant	24−27 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%

This is how RX 470 and P3200 Max-Q compete in popular games:

P3200 Max-Q is 6% faster in 1080p
P3200 Max-Q is 3% faster in 1440p
P3200 Max-Q is 5% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.87	23.40
Recency	4 August 2016	21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	75 Watt

RX 470 has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

P3200 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 12.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 60% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 470 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 470 is a desktop card while Quadro P3200 Max-Q 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.