Radeon PRO W6400 vs Quadro P3200
Radeon PRO W6400
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 Radeon PRO W6400 is positioned at rank 33 and the Quadro P3200 is on rank 86, so the Radeon PRO W6400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon PRO W6400
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P3200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro P3200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon PRO W6400.
| Insight | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| 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 $200 for the Radeon PRO W6400, it costs 69% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 223.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+223.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅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 Radeon PRO W6400 and Quadro P3200
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.
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 Radeon PRO W6400 scores 8,428 and the Quadro P3200 reaches 8,578 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon PRO W6400 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the Quadro P3200 uses Pascal, both on 6 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 768 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 1,792 (Quadro P3200). Raw compute: 3.58 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 5.53 TFLOPS (Quadro P3200). Boost clocks: 2331 MHz vs 1543 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,428 | 8,578+2% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1792+133% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.58 TFLOPS | 5.53 TFLOPS+54% |
| Boost Clock | 2331 MHz+51% | 1543 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 48 | 112+133% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 672 KB+163% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 1.5 MB (Quadro P3200) — the Quadro P3200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 12 (Quadro P3200). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 3.0 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs NVENC 6th Gen (Quadro P3200). Decoder: VCN 3.0 vs NVDEC 3rd Gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (Radeon PRO W6400) vs H.265,H.264 (Quadro P3200).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 3.0 | NVENC 6th Gen |
| Decoder | VCN 3.0 | NVDEC 3rd Gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) | H.265,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon PRO W6400 draws 50W versus the Quadro P3200's 75W — a 40% difference. The Radeon PRO W6400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 500W (Quadro P3200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-33% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 0mm |
| Height | 69mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 168.6+47% | 114.4 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon PRO W6400 launched at $229 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the Quadro P3200 launched at $500 and now averages $63. The Quadro P3200 costs 68.5% less ($137 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 42.1 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 136.2 (Quadro P3200) — the Quadro P3200 offers 223.5% better value. The Radeon PRO W6400 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2018).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Quadro P3200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $229-54% | $500 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $63-69% |
| Performance per Dollar | 42.1 | 136.2+224% |
| Codename | Navi 24 | GP104 |
| Release | January 19 2022 | February 21 2018 |
| Ranking | #308 | #304 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon PRO W6400 and Quadro P3200
