AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 occupy different corners of the GPU landscape, one a gaming-oriented card from 2015, the other a professional workstation part from 2019. The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in raw compute, but the story is more nuanced when considering memory capacity, power draw, and intended use cases. The GTX 950 leads in every benchmark category where both were measured, yet the Radeon Pro WX 3200 counters with double the VRAM and a significantly smaller physical footprint. This analysis examines what the numbers reveal about these two very different products.

The Verdict

The benchmark database shows the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 as the stronger performer in raw compute workloads. In the only head-to-head test available, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 950 scored 15,662 against the Radeon Pro WX 3200's 11,228, a difference of 39.5 percent. This is not a marginal gap; it is a decisive victory that places the GTX 950 well ahead in any OpenCL-based application.

The GTX 950 also holds a higher overall percentile rank. It sits at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 sits at the 50th percentile. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 13,189, compared to 11,228 for the AMD card. Looking at nearest rivals, the GTX 950's average score is within 1.2 percent of several comparable cards, including the AMD FirePro M6100 at 13,354 and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X at 13,321, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200's average score nearly matches the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225, a delta of zero percent, and trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M by only 0.3 percent.

For users prioritizing compute performance, the GTX 950 is the clear pick. For users needing more memory for large datasets or multi-display professional setups, the Radeon Pro WX 3200 offers 4 GB against 2 GB, which could matter in memory-constrained workloads despite its lower raw scores. The data suggests the GTX 950 wins on speed, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins on capacity and efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different design philosophies and manufacturing nodes. The GTX 950 uses the GM206 chip built on NVIDIA's Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,940 million transistors into a die size of 228 mm², giving a transistor density of 12.9 million per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 uses the Polaris 23 chip based on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This newer node allows 2,200 million transistors in a much smaller die of 103 mm², yielding a higher density of 21.4 million per square millimeter.

The compute resources differ in configuration. The GTX 950 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has fewer of each: 640 shading units, 32 texture units, and only 16 render output units. This explains part of the performance gap. The GTX 950's pixel rate is 38.02 gigapixels per second versus 20.72 for the AMD card, and its texture rate is 57.02 gigatexels per second versus 41.44.

Clock speeds also differ. The GTX 950 runs at a base clock of 1024 MHz with a boost of 1188 MHz. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database, so direct frequency comparison is impossible. Memory clocks show the GTX 950 at 1653 MHz with 6.6 Gbps effective, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective. Floating-point performance favors the GTX 950 at 1.825 TFLOPS FP32, against 1.658 TFLOPS for the AMD card. Notably, the Radeon Pro WX 3200 offers FP16 at 1.658 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the GTX 950 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it paints a stark picture. The GTX 950 scores 15,662, the Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11,228, and the delta is 39.5 percent in favor of the NVIDIA card. This is a substantial margin that suggests the GTX 950's higher shading unit count, faster memory, and greater texture and pixel throughput translate directly into measurable compute advantage.

Beyond this single test, the GTX 950 also has recorded scores in Geekbench Metal at 7,172 and Geekbench Vulkan at 16,734. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has no Metal or Vulkan scores in the database, so those tests cannot be compared. The average benchmark score for the GTX 950 across all three tests is 13,189, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200's single recorded test gives it an average of 11,228. The GTX 950's nearest rivals in the database, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 at 13,300 and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X at 13,321, are all within about one percent of its average, confirming that it performs in line with that class of hardware.

The Radeon Pro WX 3200's nearest rivals cluster differently. The AMD FirePro W4300 matches it exactly at 11,225, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M sits just 0.3 percent higher at 11,261. Interestingly, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q both score 11,088, putting the Radeon Pro WX 3200 1.3 percent ahead of them. This suggests the WX 3200 is competitive with a specific tier of older and professional cards, but it sits well below the GTX 950's performance class.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is memory capacity. The GTX 950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with a bandwidth of 105.8 GB/s. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but bandwidth drops slightly to 96.00 GB/s due to the lower memory clock. For workloads that exceed 2 GB, the AMD card has a clear advantage, but for pure bandwidth, the GTX 950 is faster.

Power and physical design diverge significantly. The GTX 950 has a TDP of 90 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 draws only 65 W and needs no external power connector. Both recommend a 250 W power supply, but the AMD card is clearly more power-efficient. The GTX 950 is dual-slot and measures 202 mm in length, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 is single-slot and measures 167 mm long by 69 mm high. For compact or low-power systems, the AMD card is the obvious fit.

The bus interface also differs: the GTX 950 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. This could limit bandwidth in some scenarios, though the practical impact depends on the workload. Display outputs are another split: the GTX 950 offers one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, which may be more suitable for multi-monitor professional setups.

API support shows minor differences. Both support DirectX 12, but the GTX 950 supports version 12_1 while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 supports 12_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan support differs, with the GTX 950 at version 1.4 and the Radeon Pro WX 3200 at 1.3. The GTX 950 also has a higher transistor count, 2,940 million versus 2,200 million, and a larger die, 228 mm² versus 103 mm².

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 has an average benchmark score of 13,189 across all recorded tests, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has an average score of 11,228 based on its single recorded test.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 950 in the head-to-head OpenCL test?

A: The GTX 950 scores 15,662 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 11,228 for the Radeon Pro WX 3200, a difference of 39.5 percent in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 3200 have any advantage in memory capacity?

A: Yes, the Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the 2 GB found on the GTX 950. However, its memory bandwidth is lower at 96.00 GB/s versus 105.8 GB/s.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 950 has a TDP of 90 W and requires a 6-pin power connector, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a TDP of 65 W and requires no external power connector. Both recommend a 250 W power supply.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan 1.4?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro WX 3200 compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 3200's average score of 11,228 is essentially identical to the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225, with a delta of zero percent, and it sits 0.3 percent below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 950 wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score is 39.5 percent higher, its FP32 throughput is 1.825 TFLOPS against 1.658 TFLOPS, and its pixel and texture rates are substantially higher at 38.02 GPixel/s and 57.02 GTexel/s versus 20.72 and 41.44. It also has more shading units (768 versus 640), more texture units (48 versus 32), and more render output units (32 versus 16). For any application that relies heavily on parallel floating-point math, rendering, or texture work, the GTX 950 is the superior choice.

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins in memory capacity and physical adaptability. Its 4 GB frame buffer doubles the GTX 950's 2 GB, which can be decisive for workloads that store large textures, geometry, or intermediate data on the GPU. Its 65 W TDP and single-slot design, with no power connector, make it far easier to integrate into small form factor or low-power systems. The four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also support more display connections than the GTX 950's mixed set of DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort. The AMD card also has a smaller die (103 mm² versus 228 mm²) and a newer 14 nm process, which contributes to its efficiency.

In terms of overall benchmark standing, the GTX 950 sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 sits at the 50th percentile. The GTX 950's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 and AMD Radeon Pro 555X, bracket its average score within one percent, indicating it is a solid mid-tier performer. The Radeon Pro WX 3200's nearest rivals, including the AMD FirePro W4300 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, place it in a lower performance tier. Users who need speed should choose the GTX 950. Users who need more memory, lower power draw, or a compact professional card should choose the Radeon Pro WX 3200. The data does not support any other conclusion.