ATI Radeon HD 3200 vs RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Place in the ranking	587	1384
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	27.86	no data
Architecture	Vega (2017−2020)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	Vega Renoir	RS780
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	7 January 2020 (5 years ago)	4 March 2008 (16 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 cores	384	40
Core clock speed	400 MHz	494 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	180 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	no data	1.976
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.03952 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	4

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	no data	PCIe 1.0 x16
Width	no data	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	no data	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	no data	System Shared
Memory bus width	no data	System Shared
Memory clock speed	no data	System Shared
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

no data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	10.0 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.1
OpenGL	no data	3.3
OpenCL	no data	1.0
Vulkan	-	N/A

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 +567%	3 −567%
1440p	22	0−1
4K	17	0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +450%	2−3 −450%
Elden Ring	16−18	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +350%	2−3 −350%
Forza Horizon 4	26 +420%	5−6 −420%
Metro Exodus	14	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	22 +450%	4−5 −450%
Valorant	25	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +50%	2−3 −50%
Dota 2	24	0−1
Elden Ring	8	0−1
Far Cry 5	26 +333%	6−7 −333%
Fortnite	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +320%	5−6 −320%
Grand Theft Auto V	15	0−1
Metro Exodus	14−16	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	39 +550%	6−7 −550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%
Valorant	12	0−1
World of Tanks	56 +409%	10−12 −409%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Dota 2	40 +3900%	1−2 −3900%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +367%	6−7 −367%
Forza Horizon 4	18 +260%	5−6 −260%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +733%	6−7 −733%
Valorant	19	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6−7	0−1
Elden Ring	7−8	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +3600%	1−2 −3600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6	0−1
World of Tanks	40−45 +4300%	1−2 −4300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11	0−1
Metro Exodus	7−8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Valorant	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
Elden Ring	3−4	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	19 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Fortnite	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	5−6	0−1
Valorant	6−7	0−1

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and ATI HD 3200 compete in popular games:

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 567% faster in 1080p

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 3600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is ahead in 28 tests (93%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.07	0.21
Recency	7 January 2020	4 March 2008
Chip lithography	7 nm	65 nm

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 2790.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 3200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while Radeon HD 3200 is a desktop one.

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