CPU
GPU
CMP 40HX
Popular choices:
Quadro P3200
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The CMP 40HX is positioned at rank 119 and the Quadro P3200 is on rank 86, so the Quadro P3200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar CMP 40HX
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P3200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The CMP 40HX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P3200.
| Insight | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P3200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $63 versus $120 for the CMP 40HX, it costs 48% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 86.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+86.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) | ✅More affordable ($63) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of CMP 40HX and Quadro P3200
CMP 40HX
The CMP 40HX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 25 2021. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1470 MHz to 1650 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 185W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 36 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,749 points. Launch price was $699.
Quadro P3200
The Quadro P3200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1328 MHz to 1543 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,578 points.
Graphics Performance
The CMP 40HX scores 8,749 and the Quadro P3200 reaches 8,578 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The CMP 40HX is built on Turing while the Quadro P3200 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (CMP 40HX) vs 1,792 (Quadro P3200). Raw compute: 7.603 TFLOPS (CMP 40HX) vs 5.53 TFLOPS (Quadro P3200). Boost clocks: 1650 MHz vs 1543 MHz.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,749+2% | 8,578 |
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+29% | 1792 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.603 TFLOPS+37% | 5.53 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz+7% | 1543 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 144+29% | 112 |
| L1 Cache | 2.3 MB+248% | 0.66 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+167% | 1.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (CMP 40HX) vs 1.5 MB (Quadro P3200) — the CMP 40HX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+167% | 1.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (CMP 40HX) vs 12 (Quadro P3200). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (CMP 40HX) vs NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P3200). Decoder: No vs NVDEC 3rd Gen.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | NVENC 6th Gen |
| Decoder | No | NVDEC 3rd Gen |
| Codecs | H.265,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The CMP 40HX draws 185W versus the Quadro P3200's 75W — a 84.6% difference. The Quadro P3200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (CMP 40HX) vs 500W (Quadro P3200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80.
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 185W | 75W-59% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 47.3 | 114.4+142% |
Value Analysis
The CMP 40HX launched at $699 MSRP and currently averages $120, while the Quadro P3200 launched at $500 and now averages $63. The Quadro P3200 costs 47.5% less ($57 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 72.9 (CMP 40HX) vs 136.2 (Quadro P3200) — the Quadro P3200 offers 86.8% better value. The CMP 40HX is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2018).
| Feature | CMP 40HX | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $699 | $500-28% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $120 | $63-48% |
| Performance per Dollar | 72.9 | 136.2+87% |
| Codename | TU106 | GP104 |
| Release | February 25 2021 | February 21 2018 |
| Ranking | #302 | #304 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on CMP 40HX and Quadro P3200
