Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs R7 M340

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M340 with Radeon Pro WX 3200, including specs and performance data.

R7 M340
2015
4 GB DDR3
1.70

Pro WX 3200 outperforms R7 M340 by a whopping 268% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking933578
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data12.41
Power efficiencyno data6.60
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameMesoPolaris 23
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)2 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$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 cores320640
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed943 MHz1082 MHz
Boost clock speed1021 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,550 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data65 Watt
Texture fill rate20.4234.62
Floating-point processing power0.6534 TFLOPS1.385 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2032

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x8
Widthno dataMXM Module
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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 GB/s64 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed2.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

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.

R7 M340 1.70
Pro WX 3200 6.26
+268%

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.

R7 M340 655
Pro WX 3200 2414
+269%

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.

R7 M340 2148
Pro WX 3200 4338
+102%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R7 M340 5427
Pro WX 3200 12538
+131%

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.

R7 M340 1209
Pro WX 3200 3156
+161%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R7 M340 6153
Pro WX 3200 18866
+207%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R7 M340 69098
Pro WX 3200 105833
+53.2%

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 HD13
−53.8%
20
+53.8%
4K2−3
−300%
8
+300%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data9.95
4Kno data24.88

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Battlefield 5 0−1 18−20
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−583%
40−45
+583%
Hitman 3 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−138%
35−40
+138%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−144%
21−24
+144%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−50%
50−55
+50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Battlefield 5 0−1 18−20
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−583%
40−45
+583%
Hitman 3 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−138%
35−40
+138%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−144%
21−24
+144%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+5%
20−22
−5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−50%
50−55
+50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−583%
40−45
+583%
Hitman 3 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−138%
35−40
+138%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−144%
21−24
+144%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−150%
10
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−50%
50−55
+50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 3−4
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 24
+0%
24
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 14
+0%
14
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how R7 M340 and Pro WX 3200 compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 3200 is 54% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 3200 is 300% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 M340 is 5% faster.
  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Pro WX 3200 is 600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R7 M340 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Pro WX 3200 is ahead in 50 tests (75%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.70 6.26
Recency 5 May 2015 2 July 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

Pro WX 3200 has a 268.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M340 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M340 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.


AMD Radeon R7 M340
Radeon R7 M340
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.


2.9 316 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M340 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 84 votes

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.