Quadro P520 Max-Q vs Radeon Pro WX 3200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking575not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.37no data
Power efficiency6.66no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code namePolaris 23GP108
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date2 July 2019 (5 years ago)23 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

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 cores640384
Core clock speed1082 MHz1303 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1493 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate34.6235.83
Floating-point processing power1.385 TFLOPS1.147 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3224

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 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
WidthMXM Moduleno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s44 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.7 (6.4)
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-6.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 July 2019 23 May 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 18 Watt

Pro WX 3200 has an age advantage of 1 month.

P520 Max-Q, on the other hand, has 261.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro WX 3200 and Quadro P520 Max-Q. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a workstation card while Quadro P520 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.

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 Pro WX 3200
Radeon Pro WX 3200
NVIDIA Quadro P520 Max-Q
Quadro P520 Max-Q

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.


3.2 81 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 3 votes

Rate Quadro P520 Max-Q 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.