Quadro P3200 vs Radeon Pro W5500
Quadro P3200
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro W5500
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 Quadro P3200 is positioned at rank 86 and the Radeon Pro W5500 is on rank 69, so the Radeon Pro W5500 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P3200
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro W5500
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro W5500 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P3200.
| Insight | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P3200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $63 versus $300 for the Radeon Pro W5500, it costs 79% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 358.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+358.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($63) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) |
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 Quadro P3200 and Radeon Pro W5500
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.
Radeon Pro W5500
The Radeon Pro W5500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 10 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1187 MHz to 1400 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 125W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,913 points. Launch price was $399.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P3200 scores 8,578 and the Radeon Pro W5500 reaches 8,913 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P3200 is built on Pascal while the Radeon Pro W5500 uses RDNA 1.0, both on 16 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 1,792 (Quadro P3200) vs 1,408 (Radeon Pro W5500). Raw compute: 5.53 TFLOPS (Quadro P3200) vs 3.942 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro W5500). Boost clocks: 1543 MHz vs 1400 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,578 | 8,913+4% |
| Architecture | Pascal | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 1792+27% | 1408 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.53 TFLOPS+40% | 3.942 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1543 MHz+10% | 1400 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 112+27% | 88 |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 2 MB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Quadro P3200 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro W5500 has 8 GB. The Radeon Pro W5500 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Quadro P3200) vs 2 MB (Radeon Pro W5500) — the Radeon Pro W5500 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 2 MB+33% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (Quadro P3200) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro W5500). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P3200) vs VCN 2.0 (Radeon Pro W5500). Decoder: NVDEC 3rd Gen vs VCN 2.0. Supported codecs: H.265,H.264 (Quadro P3200) vs HEVC,H.264,VP9 (Radeon Pro W5500).
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | VCN 2.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3rd Gen | VCN 2.0 |
| Codecs | H.265,H.264 | HEVC,H.264,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P3200 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro W5500's 125W — a 50% difference. The Quadro P3200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro P3200) vs 500W (Radeon Pro W5500). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 241mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-40% | 125W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 241mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 114.4+60% | 71.3 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P3200 launched at $500 MSRP and currently averages $63, while the Radeon Pro W5500 launched at $399 and now averages $300. The Quadro P3200 costs 79% less ($237 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 136.2 (Quadro P3200) vs 29.7 (Radeon Pro W5500) — the Quadro P3200 offers 358.6% better value. The Radeon Pro W5500 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2018).
| Feature | Quadro P3200 | Radeon Pro W5500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | $399-20% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $63-79% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 136.2+359% | 29.7 |
| Codename | GP104 | Navi 14 |
| Release | February 21 2018 | February 10 2020 |
| Ranking | #304 | #294 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro P3200 and Radeon Pro W5500
