Quadro P3200 vs Radeon PRO W6400

CPU

GPU

Quadro P3200

2018Core: 1328 MHzBoost: 1543 MHz

Buy on Amazon

Radeon PRO W6400

2022Core: 2331 MHzBoost: 2331 MHz

Buy on Amazon

Quadro P3200 vs Radeon PRO W6400 Performance Spectrum

Quadro P3200

4 GB 75

8,578

+1.8%

GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB

GeForce MX570

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti

GeForce RTX 2070 (Mobile)

GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile

TITAN V

RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Radeon PRO W6400

4 GB 50

8,428

0.0%

Radeon R9 Nano

Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

Radeon RX 7800 XT

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.

Quadro P3200 vs Radeon PRO W6400 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro P3200 vs Radeon PRO W6400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro P3200

2018

Why buy it

✅38.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌
118.3% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$229 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 17.2 vs 36.8 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
❌50% higher power demand at 75W vs 50W.

Radeon PRO W6400

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $271 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 114.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 36.8 vs 17.2 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Better long-term bet: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
✅Draws 50W instead of 75W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro P3200 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro P3200 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 38.3% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 1.8% in PassMark G3D (8,578 vs 8,428), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon PRO W6400 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, a 6nm process instead of 16nm, 12 vs 0 ray-tracing units, and a newer 2022 generation instead of 2018. That gives it the more rounded hardware package for newer games.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon PRO W6400 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $271 cheaper on MSRP at $229 vs $500, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 114.5% (36.8 vs 17.2), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Quadro P3200 still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Quadro P3200 vs Radeon PRO W6400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 W6400

The Radeon PRO W6400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 19 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2331 MHz to 2331 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,428 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro P3200 scores 8,578 and the Radeon PRO W6400 reaches 8,428 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P3200 is built on Pascal while the Radeon PRO W6400 uses RDNA 2.0, both on 16 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 1,792 (Quadro P3200) vs 768 (Radeon PRO W6400). Raw compute: 5.53 TFLOPS (Quadro P3200) vs 3.58 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W6400). Boost clocks: 1543 MHz vs 2331 MHz.

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
G3D Mark Score	8,578+2%	8,428
Architecture	Pascal	RDNA 2.0
Process Node	16 nm	6 nm
Shading Units	1792+133%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.53 TFLOPS+54%	3.58 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1543 MHz	2331 MHz+51%
ROPs	64+100%	32
TMUs	112+133%	48
L1 Cache	672 KB+163%	256 KB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 4 GB of GDDR6. Memory bus width is 256-bit on the Quadro P3200 and 256-bit on the Radeon PRO W6400. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Quadro P3200) vs 1 MB (Radeon PRO W6400) — the Quadro P3200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	256-bit	256-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (Quadro P3200) vs 12.2 (Radeon PRO W6400). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
DirectX	12	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.3+8%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4+100%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P3200) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon PRO W6400). Decoder: NVDEC 3rd Gen vs VCN 3.0. Supported codecs: H.265,H.264 (Quadro P3200) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (Radeon PRO W6400).

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
Encoder	NVENC 6th Gen	VCN 3.0
Decoder	NVDEC 3rd Gen	VCN 3.0
Codecs	H.265,H.264	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode)

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro P3200 draws 75W versus the Radeon PRO W6400's 50W — a 40% difference. The Radeon PRO W6400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro P3200) vs 500W (Radeon PRO W6400). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 70°C.

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
TDP	75W	50W-33%
Recommended PSU	500W	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	0mm	168mm
Height	0mm	69mm
Slots	0-100%	1
Temp (Load)	80	70°C-13%
Perf/Watt	114.4	168.6+47%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro P3200 came in at $500, while the Radeon PRO W6400 launched at $229. On MSRP, Radeon PRO W6400 was 54.2% cheaper ($271 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 17.2 (Quadro P3200) vs 36.8 (Radeon PRO W6400) — the Radeon PRO W6400 offers 114% better value. The newer card here is Radeon PRO W6400 (2022 vs 2018).

Feature	Quadro P3200	Radeon PRO W6400
MSRP	$500	$229-54%
Performance per Dollar	17.2	36.8+114%
Codename	GP104	Navi 24
Release	February 21 2018	January 19 2022
Ranking	#304	#308

Search Quadro P3200 on Amazon

Search Radeon PRO W6400 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.