AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs AMD Radeon RX 6500M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and the AMD Radeon RX 6500M represent two distinct generations of AMD graphics technology, separated by a significant architectural leap. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the RX 6500M decisively outperforms the WX 3200. The RX 6500M scores 38,586 points compared to the WX 3200's 11,228 points, a difference of 70.9 percent in favor of the newer mobile part. While the WX 3200 is positioned as a professional workstation card, the benchmark results indicate that the RX 6500M's raw compute capabilities are in a different class entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, which is a measure of general-purpose compute performance. In this test, the AMD Radeon RX 6500M delivers a score of 38,586, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 manages just 11,228. This represents a 70.9 percent advantage for the RX 6500M, a margin that is difficult to overstate. The WX 3200 is not just slightly behind; it is operating in a fundamentally lower performance tier. The RX 6500M's score is more than three times higher, indicating that its architecture is far more efficient at executing parallel workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 6500M also shows its strengths in other API-specific tests, though these have no direct WX 3200 counterpart in the data. For instance, the RX 6500M scores 43,837 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is a strong indicator of its modern graphics API capabilities. Its Passmark scores further illustrate its profile: 7,531 in G3D, 2,669 in GPU compute, and notably lower scores in legacy DirectX tests, such as 92 in DirectX 9 and 52 in DirectX 10. These numbers suggest a GPU optimized for modern workloads rather than older APIs.

The WX 3200, in contrast, has a single benchmark score of 11,228 in Geekbench OpenCL. This places it at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RX 6500M sits at the 48th percentile. This is a curious data point; despite the RX 6500M having a much higher average score in the head-to-head test, its overall percentile is slightly lower. This is likely due to the fact that the RX 6500M's average score of 10,362 is dragged down by its lower Passmark scores, while the WX 3200's average is exactly its OpenCL score. The nearest rivals for the WX 3200 include the AMD FirePro W4300 (average score 11,225, delta 0 percent) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (average score 11,261, delta -0.3 percent), showing it is tightly clustered with those older parts. The RX 6500M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (average score 10,400, delta -0.4 percent) and the AMD Radeon RX 550X (average score 10,481, delta -1.1 percent), indicating it is in a slightly different performance bracket when all benchmarks are considered.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6500M is the clear winner in raw compute and modern graphics performance. Its OpenCL score of 38,586 dwarfs the WX 3200's 11,228. The data indicates that the RX 6500M is designed for tasks that leverage high throughput, such as gaming or general-purpose GPU computing. Its high FP32 throughput of 4.915 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) further reinforce this position, suggesting it can handle both single-precision and half-precision workloads with ease. The RX 6500M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing features via its 16 dedicated RT cores, a capability entirely absent from the WX 3200.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200, despite its lower scores, holds a specific advantage in its intended professional environment. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is lower than the RX 6500M's 144.0 GB/s but is paired with a 65 W TDP and a single-slot design. The WX 3200 also offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a multi-display workstation solution out of the box. The RX 6500M, being a mobile IGP, has display outputs that are "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it relies on the laptop's design for connectivity. In terms of API support, the WX 3200 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, which are adequate for professional CAD or content creation applications that may not require the latest gaming features. The data shows the WX 3200 is a specialized tool, whereas the RX 6500M is a general-purpose performer.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The WX 3200 is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, using the Polaris 23 chip manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This is a mature design from the Radeon Pro Polaris generation, with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². It features 640 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). Its compute capabilities are modest, with a pixel rate of 20.72 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 41.44 GTexel/s.

In contrast, the RX 6500M is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Navi 24 chip fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This is a significantly more advanced design, packing 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, resulting in a much higher transistor density of 50.5M per mm². The RX 6500M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, effectively doubling the shader and texture resources of the WX 3200. It also introduces 16 ray tracing cores, a feature that the GCN architecture lacks entirely. The clock speeds also differ dramatically: the RX 6500M has a base clock of 2000 MHz, a game clock of 2191 MHz, and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, while the WX 3200's base and boost clocks are not provided in the data.

Memory architecture is another point of divergence. The WX 3200 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 96.00 GB/s. The RX 6500M also has 4 GB, but it is GDDR6 on a narrower 64-bit bus, yet it achieves a higher bandwidth of 144.0 GB/s due to faster memory clocks (2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective). The RX 6500M also supports PCIe 4.0 x4, while the WX 3200 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8. The FP32 compute performance illustrates the generational leap: the RX 6500M delivers 4.915 TFLOPS, nearly three times the WX 3200's 1.658 TFLOPS. The RX 6500M's FP16 performance is also asymmetric at 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1), indicating dedicated half-precision hardware, whereas the WX 3200 offers FP16 at the same rate as FP32 (1:1), suggesting a simpler execution path.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous regarding raw performance: the AMD Radeon RX 6500M is the superior GPU in compute tasks. Its OpenCL score of 38,586 versus the WX 3200's 11,228 makes it the obvious choice for any workload that relies on parallel processing. The RX 6500M also offers modern features like ray tracing support and a more recent API set (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4), making it a more future-proof option for gaming or creative applications. Its higher transistor density and advanced 6 nm process node give it a clear efficiency and capability advantage.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is not without merit in its specific niche. Its 65 W TDP, single-slot form factor, and four mini-DisplayPort outputs make it a low-profile, multi-monitor workstation card. The data shows it is an end-of-life product from 2019, with a launch MSRP of 199 USD. Its performance, while low in absolute terms, is competitive with its immediate peers like the AMD FirePro W4300 (delta 0 percent) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (delta -0.3 percent). For a professional who needs reliable multi-display output for non-intensive tasks, the WX 3200's design is purpose-built. The RX 6500M, with its IGP form factor and portable-device-dependent outputs, is not a drop-in desktop replacement. Therefore, the choice depends on the use case: the RX 6500M for compute and gaming performance, and the WX 3200 for a specific, low-power professional workstation role.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 38,586, which is 70.9 percent higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200's score of 11,228.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX 6500M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 6500M has 16 dedicated ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The WX 3200 does not have ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 6500M has a memory bandwidth of 144.0 GB/s using 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the WX 3200 has 96.00 GB/s using 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the AMD Radeon RX 6500M is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500M has 5,400 million transistors, compared to 2,200 million transistors in the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a TDP of 65 W, while the AMD Radeon RX 6500M has a lower TDP of 50 W.