Quadro P3200 vs ATI Radeon X600 PRO

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X600 PRO with Quadro P3200, including specs and performance data.

ATI X600 PRO
2004
128 MB DDR, 36 Watt
0.17

P3200 outperforms ATI X600 PRO by a whopping 12965% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1417256
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.3320.80
ArchitectureRage 9 (2003−2006)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameRV380GP104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date1 September 2004 (20 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 coresno data1792
Core clock speed400 MHz1328 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1543 MHz
Number of transistors75 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)36 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate1.600172.8
Floating-point processing powerno data5.53 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs4112

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount128 MB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed300 MHz1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth9.6 GB/s168.3 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0b12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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.

ATI X600 PRO 0.17
Quadro P3200 22.21
+12965%

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.

ATI X600 PRO 67
Quadro P3200 8740
+12945%

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 HD0−184
4K-0−128

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Far Cry 5 74
+0%
74
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 88
+0%
88
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
+0%
84
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Far Cry 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 72
+0%
72
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.17 22.21
Recency 1 September 2004 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 36 Watt 75 Watt

ATI X600 PRO has 108.3% lower power consumption.

Quadro P3200, on the other hand, has a 12964.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X600 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon X600 PRO is a desktop card while Quadro P3200 is a mobile 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.


ATI Radeon X600 PRO
Radeon X600 PRO
NVIDIA Quadro P3200
Quadro P3200

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 11 votes

Rate Radeon X600 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 308 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon X600 PRO or Quadro P3200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.