AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a higher average benchmark score of 12831, compared to 11228 for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200. The Pro 455 also sits at the 52nd percentile of all GPUs, while the WX 3200 sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the only shared benchmark test?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins with a score of 11228 against 10336 for the AMD Radeon Pro 455. This gives the WX 3200 a 7.9% lead over the Pro 455.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 455 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units, and what is the difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has 768 shading units, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 640 shading units. The Pro 455 has 128 more shading units than the WX 3200.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a TDP of 35 W and uses an MXM Module slot width. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a TDP of 65 W, is a single-slot card, and has a suggested PSU rating of 250 W. Neither card requires additional power connectors.

Q: What API levels do both cards support?

A: Both the AMD Radeon Pro 455 and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same GCN 4.0 architecture and use a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, but they employ different chips. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is based on the Baffin chip, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 uses the Polaris 23 chip. The Pro 455's Baffin chip contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The WX 3200's Polaris 23 chip holds 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, for a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². The Pro 455 therefore has a larger physical chip with more transistors.

The compute configurations differ significantly. The Radeon Pro 455 fields 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The Radeon Pro WX 3200 comes with 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Pro 455 has more shading units and more TMUs, but both share the same ROP count. Neither card includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Memory architecture is similar in bus width but differs in capacity and speed. Both use a 128-bit memory bus with GDDR5 memory, but the Pro 455 offers 2 GB while the WX 3200 offers 4 GB. The memory clock also differs: the Pro 455 runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the WX 3200. This results in bandwidth of 81.28 GB/s for the Pro 455 and 96.00 GB/s for the WX 3200.

The cards have different form factors and power profiles. The Radeon Pro 455 is an MXM Module with a 35 W TDP, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a single-slot card with a 65 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Pro 455's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, while the WX 3200 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The WX 3200 has physical dimensions of 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 wins on raw compute throughput in theory. Its peak FP32 performance reaches 1,313.3 GFLOPS, and its texture rate is 41.04 GTexel/s. The WX 3200 counters with higher FP32 (1.658 TFLOPS) and a slightly higher texture rate of 41.44 GTexel/s, but the Pro 455 still holds the edge in shading unit count and TMU count. The Pro 455 also has the higher average benchmark score at 12831, placing it at the 52nd percentile, which suggests it performs better across the broader range of workloads captured in the database's average metric.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins in the only directly comparable benchmark test. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 11228 beats the Pro 455's 10336 by 7.9%. It also provides double the memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB), which can matter for workloads that require larger datasets or higher resolution textures. The WX 3200 delivers higher pixel rate (20.72 GPixel/s versus 13.68 GPixel/s) and higher memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s). These advantages point to the WX 3200 being better suited for tasks that stress memory capacity or pixel fill.

The Radeon Pro 455, by contrast, offers higher shading and texture throughput per watt. At 35 W versus 65 W, it delivers its 1,313.3 GFLOPS at roughly half the power draw. The Pro 455's MXM form factor targets portable systems, so it fits applications where space and power are constrained. The WX 3200's single-slot desktop design and four mini-DisplayPort outputs make it the more conventional workstation card for multi-monitor setups.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 455 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Baffin | Polaris 23 |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 21.4M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz, 5.1 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 81.28 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 640 |

| TMUs | 48 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 13.68 GPixel/s | 20.72 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 41.04 GTexel/s | 41.44 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,313.3 GFLOPS | 1.658 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1) | 1.658 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | Not specified | 167 mm (6.6 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

| Release Date | 2016-10-29 | 2019-07-01 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 199 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11228, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 10336. The WX 3200 wins by a delta of 7.9%. This is the only recorded shared test, so direct comparison data is limited.

However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The Pro 455's average benchmark score is 12831, which is 14.3% higher than the WX 3200's 11228. The Pro 455's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12830, 0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5100 (12847, -0.1% delta), the AMD Radeon 740M (12870, -0.3% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12773, 0.5% delta). This places the Pro 455 in a cluster of mid-range GPUs, all within half a percent of each other.

The WX 3200's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W4300 (11225, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (11261, -0.3% delta), and two NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q variants (both 11088, 1.3% delta). The WX 3200 leads its closest competitor by essentially zero percent, but it beats the two Blackwell Max-Q parts by 1.3%. The gap between the two cards in average score is substantial, but the WX 3200's win in the single shared test complicates a simple ranking.

The theoretical specifications align with the OpenCL result in some ways. The WX 3200 has higher FP32 (1.658 TFLOPS versus 1,313.3 GFLOPS), higher pixel rate, and higher memory bandwidth. Yet the Pro 455 has more shading units, more TMUs, and a higher average benchmark score. The Pro 455 also has a higher transistor count and larger die, which may contribute to its stronger overall database standing despite the WX 3200's advantages in the OpenCL test.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 11228 beats the Radeon Pro 455's 10336 by 7.9%. It also offers 4 GB of memory versus 2 GB, higher memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s), higher pixel rate, and higher FP32 throughput. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute or memory capacity, the WX 3200 is the stronger choice. Its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also make it a more flexible desktop workstation card, and its single-slot design fits standard workstation chassis. Its launch MSRP was 199 USD.

The AMD Radeon Pro 455, however, holds the higher average benchmark score at 12831 versus 11228, a 14.3% margin. It ranks at the 52nd percentile of all GPUs, two points above the WX 3200. It pairs 768 shading units and 48 TMUs with a much lower 35 W TDP, making it the more power-efficient option for portable or thermally constrained systems. Its MXM Module form factor targets mobile workstations, so it is not a direct drop-in replacement for the WX 3200's desktop single-slot layout.

The choice depends on the use case. For desktop workstation users who need OpenCL performance, more memory, and multi-monitor output, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is the better fit. For portable systems or workloads that benefit from higher shading unit counts and lower power draw, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 is the more appropriate card. The data shows a split verdict: the WX 3200 wins the direct benchmark, while the Pro 455 wins the aggregate database average.