AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single head-to-head comparison for these two cards, and it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 scores 12,830, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11,228. This gives the GTX 590 a 14.3% lead, a substantial margin that places the two cards in different performance tiers despite their overlapping percentile rankings.

The GTX 590's advantage is not a narrow one. A 14.3% delta in a compute-oriented benchmark like OpenCL suggests the older Fermi architecture still has significant raw throughput left in it. The GTX 590's FP32 output is recorded at 1,244.2 GFLOPS, while the WX 3200 pushes 1.658 TFLOPS. Interestingly, the WX 3200 has the higher theoretical FP32 figure, yet it loses the real-world OpenCL test. This implies the GTX 590's wider memory bus (384 bit vs 128 bit) and higher memory bandwidth (164.0 GB/s vs 96.00 GB/s) may be compensating for its lower raw compute rating. The data does not explain the discrepancy, but it is a clear sign that memory throughput matters heavily in this workload.

The GTX 590 also wins on pixel and texture rates in the specification sheet, though the margins are small. Its pixel rate is 19.46 GPixel/s against the WX 3200's 20.72 GPixel/s, so the AMD card actually wins that metric. The texture rate is closer: 38.91 GTexel/s for NVIDIA versus 41.44 GTexel/s for AMD. So the younger Polaris chip has the edge in those two rasterization-focused rates, yet still loses the overall benchmark. This suggests the OpenCL test is not purely fill-rate bound, or that the GTX 590's 48 ROPs and 64 TMUs (versus 16 ROPs and 32 TMUs on the WX 3200) provide a structural advantage that raw rates do not capture.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database adds context. The GTX 590 sits at the 52nd percentile of all GPUs, with its closest competitor being the AMD Radeon Pro 455 at 12,831, a delta of 0%. The NVIDIA card effectively ties that mobile workstation part. Its other neighbors include the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847, -0.1%), the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870, -0.3%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773, +0.4%). These are all within a fraction of a percent, meaning the GTX 590 lands in a very tight cluster of mid-range performers.

The WX 3200, by contrast, sits at the 50th percentile. Its nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225, a delta of 0%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M comes in at 11,261, which is 0.3% ahead of the WX 3200. Two professional Blackwell parts, the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q, both score 11,088, which is 1.3% behind the WX 3200. This is a notable grouping: the WX 3200 is competitive with much newer workstation cards, but it is also clearly a step below the GTX 590's performance neighborhood.

The win count is simple: the GTX 590 takes 1 win, the WX 3200 takes 0. There are no other benchmark tests in the database for this pairing, so the comparison rests entirely on this single OpenCL result. That is a limitation, but the delta is consistent and large enough to draw a clear conclusion.

The Verdict

The data points to one answer: for raw compute performance, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is the stronger card. It holds a 14.3% lead over the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 in the only recorded benchmark. The GTX 590 also ranks higher overall, at the 52nd percentile versus the 50th. That two-point percentile gap is small, but the benchmark delta is not.

However, the verdict is not just about speed. The GTX 590 is a dual-slot, 365 W card requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 750 W suggested PSU. The WX 3200 is a single-slot, 65 W card with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The database does not include power efficiency metrics, but the physical and electrical requirements are clear. A user building a compact workstation or a low-power system cannot simply choose the faster card; the GTX 590 demands a power supply and chassis that the WX 3200 does not.

The release dates also matter. The GTX 590 launched in March 2011, while the WX 3200 arrived in July 2019. Both are marked end-of-life in the database, so neither is a current purchase for a new build. But the eight-year gap explains the architectural differences: Fermi 2.0 on 40 nm versus GCN 4.0 on 14 nm. The WX 3200 is the more modern design, with a smaller die (103 mm² vs 520 mm²) and higher transistor density (21.4M / mm² vs 5.8M / mm²). Yet the older, larger chip wins the compute test. That is a surprising result worth highlighting.

For a buyer who prioritizes benchmark score above all else, the GTX 590 is the pick. For a buyer who needs a low-profile, low-power card with modern API support, the WX 3200 is the only viable choice from this data. The GTX 590 does not support Vulkan in the database (the field is null), while the WX 3200 supports Vulkan 1.3. DirectX support also differs: the GTX 590 is rated for DirectX 12 (11_0), while the WX 3200 is rated for DirectX 12 (12_0). These are meaningful software compatibility differences that go beyond raw speed.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 590 wins the only benchmark test, so it is the clear performance champion in this comparison. Its 14.3% lead in OpenCL suggests it is better suited for compute-heavy tasks that leverage GPGPU acceleration, such as rendering, scientific simulations, or any workload that stresses memory bandwidth. The 384 bit bus and 164.0 GB/s bandwidth are significantly higher than the WX 3200's figures, which likely explains the advantage.

The WX 3200 wins on every practical deployment metric. It is a single-slot card measuring 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height, versus the GTX 590's 279 mm length and 111 mm height. The GTX 590 is also 40 mm wide, while the WX 3200's width is not recorded in the database, implying it is a standard low-profile or half-height design. The power draw difference is enormous: 65 W versus 365 W. The WX 3200 does not need any auxiliary power connectors, while the GTX 590 requires two 8-pin connectors. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the AMD card and 750 W for the NVIDIA card.

The WX 3200 also wins on display outputs. It offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the GTX 590 offers 3x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort. For a professional workstation with multiple monitors, the WX 3200's four modern DisplayPort connections are more flexible and support higher resolutions with newer standards. The GTX 590's DVI-heavy output set is dated.

The WX 3200 has more memory (4 GB vs 1536 MB) and supports newer APIs. Its Vulkan 1.3 support and DirectX 12 (12_0) feature level are both ahead of the GTX 590's DirectX 12 (11_0). The GTX 590 has no Vulkan support recorded. For modern applications that rely on Vulkan or newer DirectX features, the WX 3200 is the only option.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the recorded benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 scores 12,830 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 14.3% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200's score of 11,228.

Q: Does the WX 3200 beat the GTX 590 in any metric?

A: Yes, the WX 3200 has a higher pixel rate (20.72 GPixel/s vs 19.46 GPixel/s), a higher texture rate (41.44 GTexel/s vs 38.91 GTexel/s), and more memory (4 GB vs 1536 MB). It also supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 590 supports only DirectX 12 (11_0) and no Vulkan.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 590 has a TDP of 365 W and requires a 750 W suggested PSU with 2x 8-pin connectors. The WX 3200 has a TDP of 65 W, requires no power connectors, and has a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 590's closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 455, which scores 12,831, a 0% delta. The WX 3200's closest rival is the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225, also a 0% delta. The GTX 590's performance cluster is around 12,800, while the WX 3200's cluster is around 11,200.

Q: Which card is better for a small form factor build?

A: The WX 3200 is clearly better for space-constrained builds. It is single-slot, 167 mm long, 69 mm tall, and 65 W. The GTX 590 is dual-slot, 279 mm long, 111 mm tall, 40 mm wide, and 365 W.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are marked end-of-life in the database. The GTX 590 was released in March 2011, and the WX 3200 was released in July 2019.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is vast, reflecting their eight-year separation. The GTX 590 uses the GF110 chip based on NVIDIA's Fermi 2.0 architecture, built on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.8M per mm². The WX 3200 uses the Polaris 23 chip based on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. It packs 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, for a density of 21.4M per mm².

The compute configurations differ substantially. The GTX 590 has 512 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The WX 3200 has 640 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The AMD card has more shaders but far fewer texture units and ROPs. The GTX 590's FP32 throughput is 1,244.2 GFLOPS, while the WX 3200's is 1.658 TFLOPS. The WX 3200 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (1.658 TFLOPS), while the GTX 590 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The GTX 590 uses 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384 bit bus, delivering 164.0 GB/s bandwidth. The WX 3200 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s. The memory clock differs: the GTX 590 runs at 854 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective), while the WX 3200 runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The WX 3200's memory is faster per pin, but the GTX 590's wider bus gives it a 70% bandwidth advantage.

API support also separates them. The GTX 590 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan. The WX 3200 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The bus interface differs too: PCIe 2.0 x16 for the GTX 590 versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the WX 3200. The newer PCIe 3.0 standard offers more bandwidth per lane, but the x8 configuration halves the lane count.

Specification Differences

The physical specifications are night and day. The GTX 590 is a dual-slot card measuring 279 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm. The WX 3200 is single-slot at 167 mm by 69 mm, with no width recorded. The GTX 590 requires 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 750 W PSU, while the WX 3200 needs no connectors and only a 250 W PSU. The TDP difference is 365 W versus 65 W.

Display outputs differ: the GTX 590 has 3x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort, while the WX 3200 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Memory capacity and bus width differ as noted: 1536 MB on 384 bit versus 4 GB on 128 bit. The memory clock is 854 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The launch MSRP for the GTX 590 was 699 USD, while the WX 3200 launched at 199 USD. The release dates are March 2011 and July 2019, respectively. The GTX 590's predecessor is GeForce 400 and its successor is GeForce 600. The WX 3200's predecessor is Radeon Pro GCN and its successor is Radeon Pro Vega. The GTX 590 uses a 40 nm process and TSMC foundry, while the WX 3200 uses 14 nm and GlobalFoundries. The GTX 590 has 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, while the WX 3200 has 2,200 million on 103 mm². Shading units are 512 versus 640, TMUs are 64 versus 32, and ROPs are 48 versus 16. Pixel rate is 19.46 GPixel/s versus 20.72 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 38.91 GTexel/s versus 41.44 GTexel/s. FP32 is 1,244.2 GFLOPS versus 1.658 TFLOPS. The GTX 590 has no FP16 data; the WX 3200 has 1.658 TFLOPS FP16.