Quadro P3200 Max-Q vs Radeon R9 285

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. The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is positioned at rank #8 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro P3200 Max-Q

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

182%

#8

Quadro P3200 Max-Q

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro P3200 Max-Q likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 285 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 285 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P3200 Max-Q.

Insight	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon R9 285 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

Quadro P3200 Max-Q Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 285 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro P3200 Max-Q and Radeon R9 285

Quadro P3200 Max-Q

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1139 MHz to 1404 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,500 points.

Radeon R9 285

The Radeon R9 285 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 2 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 918 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,680 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q scores 6,500 and the Radeon R9 285 reaches 6,680 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is built on Pascal while the Radeon R9 285 uses GCN 3.0, both on 16 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,792 (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 285). Raw compute: 5.032 TFLOPS (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 285).

Feature	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
G3D Mark Score	6,500	6,680+3%
Architecture	Pascal	GCN 3.0
Process Node	16 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1792	1792
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.032 TFLOPS+53%	3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs	64+100%	32
TMUs	112	112
L1 Cache	672 KB+50%	448 KB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+200%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 285) — the Quadro P3200 Max-Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Bus Width	256-bit	256-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+200%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 285). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12.0
Vulkan	1.4+17%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6+5%	4.4
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 6th Gen NVENC (Pascal) (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 285). Decoder: 3rd Gen NVDEC vs UVD 5.0. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,VP9,MPEG-2 (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Radeon R9 285).

Feature	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
Encoder	6th Gen NVENC (Pascal)	VCE 3.0
Decoder	3rd Gen NVDEC	UVD 5.0
Codecs	H.264,HEVC,VP9,MPEG-2	MPEG-2,H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 285's 190W — a 86.8% difference. The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro P3200 Max-Q) vs 500W (Radeon R9 285). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 65°C.

Feature	Quadro P3200 Max-Q	Radeon R9 285
TDP	75W-61%	190W
Recommended PSU	350W-30%	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	2x 6-pin
Length	—	221mm
Height	—	109mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	65°C-13%
Perf/Watt	86.7+146%	35.2