AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear performance hierarchy for these two end-of-life workstation and desktop GPUs. In the sole benchmark test available in the database, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 13300, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11228. This results in an 18.5% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a substantial margin in compute workloads.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 occupies the 53rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 sits at the 50th percentile. Although both cards cluster around the midpoint of the performance distribution, the GTX 480's higher percentile and superior raw score make it the default choice for users prioritizing maximum compute throughput in OpenCL applications.

However, the choice is not purely about performance. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 offers a dramatically more efficient and modern platform. Its 65 W TDP stands in stark contrast to the GTX 480's 250 W TDP, and it requires no external power connectors, drawing power solely from the PCIe slot. The GTX 480 demands a 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connector setup and a 600 W suggested power supply. For systems with power or thermal constraints, the WX 3200 is the only viable option.

The verdict from the data: choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 if your sole criterion is peak OpenCL compute performance and you have the power delivery and physical space to accommodate a 267 mm, dual-slot card. Choose the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 if you need a low-power, single-slot card with modern display outputs, more memory, and a smaller physical footprint, and you are willing to accept the 18.5% performance deficit in this specific benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

The performance landscape is one-sided in the recorded database. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 13300 against the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200's 11228. The 18.5% delta is significant and suggests that in pure compute throughput, the Fermi architecture still holds an advantage over the GCN 4.0 architecture in this workload.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins in every non-performance category. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory doubles the GTX 480's 1536 MB, which is critical for large datasets or high-resolution textures in professional applications. It also offers a more modern feature set: support for Vulkan 1.3, DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the GTX 480's DirectX 12 (11_0), and four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus the GTX 480's 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The WX 3200 is also a single-slot card measuring 167 mm in length, compared to the GTX 480's dual-slot, 267 mm design.

In terms of power efficiency, the AMD card is the clear victor. Its 65 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for compact workstations or systems with limited power budgets. The GTX 480's 250 W TDP and 600 W suggested PSU requirement place it in a completely different power class.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies from different eras. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 uses the GF100 chip based on the Fermi architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,100 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 uses the Polaris 23 chip based on GCN 4.0, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 2,200 million transistors into a much smaller 103 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter, nearly four times higher.

The memory subsystems are also vastly different. The GTX 480 features a 384-bit memory bus with 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory, delivering 177.4 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 3.7 Gbps. The WX 3200 uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth at 6 Gbps effective. The GTX 480's wider bus gives it significantly more bandwidth, which likely contributes to its OpenCL win, while the WX 3200's larger capacity benefits applications that need to hold more data locally.

The compute units differ in configuration. The GTX 480 has 480 shading units, 60 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The WX 3200 has 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 480's higher TMU and ROP counts support its superior pixel rate of 21.03 GPixel/s and texture rate of 42.06 GTexel/s. The WX 3200's pixel rate is 20.72 GPixel/s and texture rate is 41.44 GTexel/s, both marginally lower.

In floating-point performance, the numbers favor the AMD card. The WX 3200 delivers 1.658 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and offers 1.658 TFLOPS of FP16 performance in a 1:1 ratio. The GTX 480 provides 1,345.0 GFLOPS (or 1.345 TFLOPS) of FP32, with no FP16 capability recorded. This is an interesting divergence: the WX 3200 is technically more capable in raw floating-point math, yet it loses the OpenCL benchmark, suggesting that memory bandwidth, driver optimization, or other architectural factors play a larger role in that specific test.

The bus interfaces also differ: the GTX 480 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the WX 3200 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The newer PCIe 3.0 standard offers more bandwidth per lane, but the GTX 480's x16 implementation may still provide comparable or better throughput in some scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 scores 13300, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11228, a difference of 18.5% in favor of the GTX 480.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 has 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a 65 W TDP and requires no external power connectors. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 has a 250 W TDP and requires a 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connector with a 600 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which card supports modern APIs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and does not have recorded Vulkan support in the database.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a single-slot card measuring 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length.

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 has a 384-bit memory bus delivering 177.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a 128-bit bus delivering 96.00 GB/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this measurement, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 achieves a score of 13300, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 achieves 11228. The delta of 18.5% is decisive and represents the GTX 480's only recorded win in the comparison, as well as its only recorded benchmark overall.

To contextualize the GTX 480's performance, its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 555X with an average score of 13321 (a 0.2% delta), the AMD FirePro M6100 at 13354 (0.4% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 5500M at 13356 (0.4% delta). This places the GTX 480 in a tight cluster of mid-range mobile and workstation GPUs, where a 1% change in score separates several products.

For the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200, its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11225 (a 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M at 11261 (0.3% delta), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q at 11088 (1.3% delta). The WX 3200's score of 11228 sits slightly above the W4300 and below the GTX 780M, showing it competes with older high-end mobile GPUs and entry-level workstation cards.

The 18.5% performance gap between the two cards in this test is substantial, but it should be interpreted with caution. The GTX 480's superior memory bandwidth of 177.4 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s likely plays a significant role in the OpenCL workload, which can be memory-bound. The GTX 480 also has a higher pixel rate (21.03 GPixel/s versus 20.72 GPixel/s) and texture rate (42.06 GTexel/s versus 41.44 GTexel/s), though these margins are narrow.

Interestingly, the AMD card's higher theoretical FP32 throughput (1.658 TFLOPS versus 1,345.0 GFLOPS) does not translate into a benchmark win. This suggests that the OpenCL test may be more sensitive to memory bandwidth, driver efficiency, or other architectural factors than to raw compute throughput. The GTX 480's 384-bit memory bus provides 1.85 times the bandwidth of the WX 3200's 128-bit bus, which could outweigh the AMD card's 23% advantage in FP32 performance.

The release timeline also matters for interpretation. The GTX 480 launched with a 499 USD MSRP, while the WX 3200 launched with a 199 USD MSRP. The GTX 480 is an older design from the GeForce 400 generation, while the WX 3200 comes from the Radeon Pro Polaris generation. Despite the generational gap, the GTX 480's high-end positioning at launch gives it a performance edge that the entry-level WX 3200 cannot overcome in this specific test.

In summary, the head-to-head data shows a clear winner in the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 for OpenCL compute performance, but the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 offers a more balanced package with lower power consumption, more memory, modern API support, and a smaller physical footprint. The choice between them depends entirely on whether peak compute performance or system integration flexibility takes priority.