Radeon RX 6900 XT vs Pro WX 3200

Place in the ranking	578	23
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	12.42	29.89
Power efficiency	6.60	15.86
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Polaris 23	Navi 21
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	2 July 2019 (5 years ago)	28 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6900 XT has 141% better value for money than Pro WX 3200.

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	640	5120
Core clock speed	1082 MHz	1825 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2250 MHz
Number of transistors	2,200 million	26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	300 Watt
Texture fill rate	34.62	720.0
Floating-point processing power	1.385 TFLOPS	23.04 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	128
TMUs	32	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	80

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 x8	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	MXM Module	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 8-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64 GB/s	512.0 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	4x mini-DisplayPort	1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2

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.

Pro WX 3200 6.26

RX 6900 XT 69.42
+1009%

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.

Pro WX 3200 2414

RX 6900 XT 26751
+1008%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Pro WX 3200 4338

RX 6900 XT 59119
+1263%

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.

Pro WX 3200 3156

RX 6900 XT 50587
+1503%

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	20 −880%	196 +880%
1440p	10−12 −1200%	130 +1200%
4K	8 −913%	81 +913%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	9.95	5.10
1440p	19.90	7.68
4K	24.88	12.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

−1250%

130−140
+1250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 −631%	117 +631%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −2013%	169 +2013%
Battlefield 5	18−20 −1133%	220−230 +1133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −815%	110−120 +815%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −1250%	130−140 +1250%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −736%	110−120 +736%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 −844%	170−180 +844%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −480%	230−240 +480%
Hitman 3	12−14 −892%	120−130 +892%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −566%	250−260 +566%
Metro Exodus	24 −546%	150−160 +546%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −618%	120−130 +618%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −1232%	290−300 +1232%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 −198%	150−160 +198%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 −1644%	279 +1644%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −1675%	142 +1675%
Battlefield 5	18−20 −1133%	220−230 +1133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −815%	110−120 +815%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −1250%	130−140 +1250%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −736%	110−120 +736%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 −844%	170−180 +844%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −480%	230−240 +480%
Hitman 3	12−14 −892%	120−130 +892%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −566%	250−260 +566%
Metro Exodus	14 −1007%	150−160 +1007%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −618%	120−130 +618%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −1232%	290−300 +1232%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −645%	140−150 +645%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 −198%	150−160 +198%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 −513%	98 +513%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −1613%	137 +1613%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −815%	110−120 +815%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −1250%	130−140 +1250%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −736%	110−120 +736%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −505%	248 +505%
Hitman 3	12−14 −892%	120−130 +892%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −645%	283 +645%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −1232%	290−300 +1232%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 −1540%	164 +1540%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 −137%	121 +137%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−618%

120−130
+618%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −1275%	160−170 +1275%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −1010%	110−120 +1010%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −1550%	99 +1550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −10800%	109 +10800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1250%	80−85 +1250%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2367%	70−75 +2367%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1071%	80−85 +1071%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −1255%	270−280 +1255%
Hitman 3	10−11 −910%	100−110 +910%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −1500%	224 +1500%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −1850%	117 +1850%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 −9750%	190−200 +9750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −2420%	120−130 +2420%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −498%	230−240 +498%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

−936%

110−120
+936%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −1640%	85−90 +1640%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −1625%	65−70 +1625%
Hitman 3	2−3 −4050%	83 +4050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −1229%	220−230 +1229%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −3567%	110−120 +3567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5 −2340%	122 +2340%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1600%	68 +1600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −2100%	66 +2100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1600%	50−55 +1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	35−40
Far Cry 5	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −2600%	162 +2600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2 −10900%	110−120 +10900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −2600%	54 +2600%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

−971%

75−80
+971%

This is how Pro WX 3200 and RX 6900 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6900 XT is 880% faster in 1080p
RX 6900 XT is 1200% faster in 1440p
RX 6900 XT is 913% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6900 XT is 10900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 6900 XT surpassed Pro WX 3200 in all 71 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.26	69.42
Recency	2 July 2019	28 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	300 Watt

Pro WX 3200 has 361.5% lower power consumption.

RX 6900 XT, on the other hand, has a 1008.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 3200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6900 XT is a desktop one.

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