AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT is in a completely different performance class than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 760M XT scores 74,869 against the Pro WX 3200's 11,228, a delta of 566.8%. That is not a small gap; it is a generational chasm. The RX 7600M XT also carries a much higher average benchmark score of 12,710 compared to 11,228 for the Pro WX 3200, and it sits in the 52nd percentile of all GPUs versus the 50th percentile for the older card.

For a user building a modern gaming laptop or a high-performance mobile workstation, the RX 7600M XT is the only rational choice here. It delivers RDNA 3.0 features, 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, and ray tracing support, all of which are absent on the Pro WX 3200. The Pro WX 3200 is an end-of-life product from 2019 with a 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer and GCN 4.0 architecture. Its only advantage is a lower 65 W TDP and a single-slot form factor, which makes it suitable for compact, low-power systems where absolute performance is not the priority.

The verdict is straightforward: if you need compute power, modern API support, or gaming capability, pick the RX 7600M XT. If you need a low-profile, low-power card for basic professional display tasks in a small chassis, the Pro WX 3200 works, but it is obsolete. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the Pro WX 3200 wins a performance comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600M XT wins the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, by an enormous margin. That single test covers general-purpose GPU compute, and the 566.8% delta shows that the newer card is not just faster, it is in a different league. Beyond that, the RX 7600M XT has a suite of additional benchmarks in the database: 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) at 2,048, Geekbench Vulkan at 27,793, Passmark DirectX 10 at 76, DirectX 11 at 137, DirectX 12 at 58, DirectX 9 at 175, G2D at 894, G3D at 13,907, and GPU compute at 7,140. These scores indicate strong DirectX and Vulkan performance, suitable for gaming and modern workloads.

The Pro WX 3200 has no wins in any recorded comparison. Its only benchmark result is the Geekbench OpenCL score of 11,228, which is lower than the RX 7600M XT's score in the same test. The Pro WX 3200 does have a lower TDP of 65 W versus 120 W, and it is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs, whereas the RX 7600M XT is an IGP with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." So, the Pro WX 3200 wins on power efficiency and physical flexibility in multi-display professional setups, but not on raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7600M XT is built on the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The Pro WX 3200 uses the Polaris 23 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, made on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, with a density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap: 6 nm versus 14 nm allows nearly double the transistor density.

Memory architecture differs sharply. The RX 7600M XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and an effective memory clock of 18 Gbps. The Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth and an effective clock of 6 Gbps. That is a 3x difference in bandwidth, which directly impacts compute and texture-heavy workloads.

Compute resources are also vastly different. The RX 7600M XT has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 RT cores. The Pro WX 3200 has 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. The RX 7600M XT achieves 20.23 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 40.45 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the Pro WX 3200 manages 1.658 TFLOPS FP32 and 1.658 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The pixel rate is 158.0 GPixel/s versus 20.72 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 316.0 GTexel/s versus 41.44 GTexel/s.

API support also differs. The RX 7600M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Pro WX 3200 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 7600M XT is part of the Radeon RX 7000 series with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish," while the Pro WX 3200 belongs to the Radeon Pro Polaris generation with no codename listed.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The RX 7600M XT is massively faster. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 74,869 versus 11,228 for the Pro WX 3200, a 566.8% advantage.

Q: Can the Pro WX 3200 handle ray tracing?

A: No. The Pro WX 3200 has no RT cores, while the RX 7600M XT has 32 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: What is the memory difference?

A: The RX 7600M XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The Pro WX 3200 has a 65 W TDP versus 120 W for the RX 7600M XT, so it draws less power, but it also delivers far less performance.

Q: Is the RX 7600M XT suitable for modern gaming?

A: Yes, based on its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, Vulkan 1.4, and benchmark scores like 3DMark Steel Nomad at 2,048 and Passmark G3D at 13,907.

Q: What is the Pro WX 3200's target use case?

A: It is a single-slot, 65 W card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs, suited for multi-display professional setups where low power and compact size matter more than raw compute.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between the two cards is Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the RX 7600M XT scores 74,869, and the Pro WX 3200 scores 11,228. The delta is 566.8%, meaning the RX 7600M XT is nearly seven times faster in this compute workload. This is the largest single margin in the recorded data, and it reflects the architectural gulf between RDNA 3.0 and GCN 4.0.

Beyond that single test, the RX 7600M XT has additional benchmarks that the Pro WX 3200 lacks entirely. For example, in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), the RX 7600M XT scores 2,048, which indicates it can handle modern DirectX 12 titles at playable settings. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 27,793, showing strong cross-platform graphics performance. Passmark results further confirm its capability: G3D at 13,907 and GPU compute at 7,140. The Pro WX 3200 has no corresponding scores in these tests, so no direct comparison is possible, but the absence of data suggests it was not tested or could not run them.

The RX 7600M XT also has a higher average benchmark score of 12,710 across its suite, while the Pro WX 3200's average is 11,228 based on its single result. The nearest rivals for the RX 7600M XT include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (avg 12,773, delta -0.5%) and the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (avg 12,831, delta -0.9%), placing it in the same performance tier as those older cards. The Pro WX 3200's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W4300 (avg 11,225, delta 0%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (avg 11,261, delta -0.3%), showing it is roughly equivalent to those products.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification that matters. The RX 7600M XT uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Pro WX 3200 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Transistor count is 13,300 million versus 2,200 million, and die size is 204 mm² versus 103 mm². The RX 7600M XT has a base clock of 1280 MHz, boost clock of 2469 MHz, and game clock of 2023 MHz; the Pro WX 3200 has no listed clocks for base, boost, or game. Memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RX 7600M XT and 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the Pro WX 3200.

Memory configuration: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth for the RX 7600M XT; 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth for the Pro WX 3200. Shading units are 2,048 versus 640, TMUs are 128 versus 32, and ROPs are 64 versus 16. The RX 7600M XT has 32 RT cores; the Pro WX 3200 has none. FP32 performance is 20.23 TFLOPS versus 1.658 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 40.45 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 1.658 TFLOPS (1:1). Pixel rate is 158.0 GPixel/s versus 20.72 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 316.0 GTexel/s versus 41.44 GTexel/s.

TDP is 120 W for the RX 7600M XT and 65 W for the Pro WX 3200. The RX 7600M XT is an IGP with no power connectors and a portable-device-dependent display output. The Pro WX 3200 is single-slot, has no power connectors, suggests a 250 W PSU, and offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RX 7600M XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Pro WX 3200 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) for the RX 7600M XT and 12 (12_0) for the Pro WX 3200. Vulkan support is 1.4 versus 1.3. The RX 7600M XT was released in January 2023 and is active; the Pro WX 3200 was released in July 2019 and is end-of-life. The Pro WX 3200 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD.