Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs GeForce GTX 1660 Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated572
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data12.48
Power efficiencyno data6.67
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameTU116Polaris 23
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)2 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $199

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 coresno data640
Core clock speed1140 MHz1082 MHz
Boost clock speed1335 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data65 Watt
Texture fill rateno data34.62
Floating-point processing powerno data1.385 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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
Widthno dataMXM Module
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data64 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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12.0 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm

GTX 1660 Max-Q has a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1660 Max-Q and Radeon Pro WX 3200. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1660 Max-Q is a notebook card while Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a workstation one.


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

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1660 Max-Q
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
Radeon Pro WX 3200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 18 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 81 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.