Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs Quadro P5000
Radeon Pro WX 8200
Popular choices:
Quadro P5000
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro WX 8200
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P5000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon Pro WX 8200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro P5000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro P5000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (16 GB vs 8 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon Pro WX 8200.
| Insight | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $350 versus $400 for the Quadro P5000, it costs 13% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 13.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+13.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($350) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($400) |
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 WX 8200 and Quadro P5000
Radeon Pro WX 8200
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 13 2018. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1200 MHz to 1500 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 230W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,615 points. Launch price was $999.
Quadro P5000
The Quadro P5000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 1 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,728 points. Launch price was $2,499.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 scores 12,615 and the Quadro P5000 reaches 12,728 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is built on GCN 5.0 while the Quadro P5000 uses Pascal, both on 14 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 3,584 (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 2,048 (Quadro P5000). Raw compute: 10.75 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 8.873 TFLOPS (Quadro P5000). Boost clocks: 1500 MHz vs 1733 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 12,615 | 12,728 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 3584+75% | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 10.75 TFLOPS+21% | 8.873 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1500 MHz | 1733 MHz+16% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 224+40% | 160 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | 960 KB+7% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+100% | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro P5000 has 16 GB. The Quadro P5000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 2 MB (Quadro P5000) — the Radeon Pro WX 8200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 16 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+100% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 12.1 (Quadro P5000). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.0. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1+10% | 1.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 4.0 (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 6th Gen NVENC (Quadro P5000). Decoder: UVD 7.0 vs 3rd Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro P5000).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 4.0 | 6th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | UVD 7.0 | 3rd Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 draws 230W versus the Quadro P5000's 180W — a 24.4% difference. The Quadro P5000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 500W (Quadro P5000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 230W | 180W-22% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 54.8 | 70.7+29% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon Pro WX 8200 launched at $999 MSRP and currently averages $350, while the Quadro P5000 launched at $2499 and now averages $400. The Radeon Pro WX 8200 costs 12.5% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 36.0 (Radeon Pro WX 8200) vs 31.8 (Quadro P5000) — the Radeon Pro WX 8200 offers 13.2% better value. The Radeon Pro WX 8200 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2016).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 8200 | Quadro P5000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $999-60% | $2499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $350-13% | $400 |
| Performance per Dollar | 36.0+13% | 31.8 |
| Codename | Vega 10 | GP104 |
| Release | August 13 2018 | October 1 2016 |
| Ranking | #210 | #206 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon Pro WX 8200 and Quadro P5000
