AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one direct head-to-head benchmark between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200, but the margin is decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA part scores 57,915 points against AMD's 11,228 points. That is a delta of 415.8 percent, meaning the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile delivers roughly five times the raw OpenCL compute throughput of the Radeon Pro WX 3200. This is not a marginal victory; it is a category-level gap.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 12,940. That places it at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon Pro WX 3200, by contrast, holds an average score of 11,228, which sits at the 50th percentile. The NVIDIA part also posts a Geekbench Vulkan score of 55,812, a figure that has no direct counterpart in the AMD's recorded data, but it reinforces the NVIDIA part's compute advantage in cross-platform APIs.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200's single recorded benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL at 11,228, is its only data point. Its nearest rival, the AMD FirePro W4300, scores 11,225, a delta of 0 percent. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M comes in at 11,261, which is 0.3 percent higher than the WX 3200. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q both score 11,088, putting the WX 3200 1.3 percent ahead of them. These are tightly clustered scores, indicating that the WX 3200 is performing exactly at the level expected of its class.

For the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, the nearest rival cluster tells a different story. The AMD Radeon RX 580 averages 12,928, a delta of 0.1 percent relative to the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER scores 12,986, putting it 0.4 percent ahead of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile. The AMD Radeon 740M scores 12,870, which is 0.5 percent behind. The AMD FirePro W5100 scores 12,847, 0.7 percent behind. The NVIDIA part sits in the middle of a very tight pack, where a 0.7 percent swing separates the lowest and highest scorers.

The head-to-head result is unambiguous, but it is importantly the two products are not competing in the same segment. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is a mobile gaming-class part with a 75 W TDP, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a professional workstation card with a 65 W TDP. The compute gap is the headline, and the rest of the data confirms that the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is in a different performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins the only direct comparison, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a factor of 5.15. It also holds a substantial lead in the database's aggregate metrics. Its Passmark G3D score is 10,093, its Passmark G2D score is 498, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 4,305. These figures are not available for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200, but the average benchmark score difference (12,940 versus 11,228) suggests that the NVIDIA part outperforms the AMD part across the board, not just in one synthetic test.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins in exactly zero recorded head-to-head benchmarks. However, its strengths lie elsewhere: it is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it suitable for multi-display professional environments. It also draws less power at 65 W versus 75 W, and it has a longer physical footprint at 167 mm, which is typical for a workstation card with four outputs. The NVIDIA part is an IGP (integrated graphics package) with portable device dependent display outputs, meaning it is designed to be soldered onto a laptop motherboard rather than installed into a desktop workstation.

The use-case split is therefore clear. For compute-heavy workloads such as OpenCL acceleration, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the only choice. For professional multi-monitor setups where the GPU must fit into a single PCIe slot and drive four displays, the Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a physical and connectivity advantage that the NVIDIA part cannot match, despite its lower compute scores.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: It scores 57,915 points versus the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200's 11,228 points, a delta of 415.8 percent. That makes it approximately 5.15 times faster in this specific test.

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has an average benchmark score of 12,940 across all recorded tests. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has an average score of 11,228 from its single recorded benchmark.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each GPU?

A: For the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 580 with an average score of 12,928, a delta of 0.1 percent. For the Radeon Pro WX 3200, the nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4300 with an average score of 11,225, a delta of 0 percent.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 have any benchmark wins over the NVIDIA part?

A: No. In the single head-to-head benchmark recorded, Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA part wins. The wins count is 1 for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA part has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 sits at the 50th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 640 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The NVIDIA part also features 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, while the AMD part has none of either.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity but not in speed. Both have 4 GB of VRAM and a 128-bit memory bus. The NVIDIA part uses GDDR6 memory at 1,500 MHz with a 12 Gbps effective data rate, yielding a bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. The AMD part uses GDDR5 memory at 1,500 MHz with a 6 Gbps effective data rate, yielding a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. The NVIDIA part has twice the memory bandwidth.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The NVIDIA part produces 33.12 GPixel/s and 82.80 GTexel/s. The AMD part produces 20.72 GPixel/s and 41.44 GTexel/s. Floating point performance: the NVIDIA part delivers 5.299 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio). The AMD part delivers 1.658 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio.

Power draw is close but favors AMD: 75 W for NVIDIA versus 65 W for AMD. The NVIDIA part is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The AMD part is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The bus interface differs: the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD part uses PCIe 3.0 x8.

Physical dimensions differ as well. The AMD part measures 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The NVIDIA part has no recorded dimensions because it is an integrated mobile package. Display outputs: the AMD part has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the NVIDIA part's outputs are portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA106 chip. It is fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process node, containing 12,000 million transistors on a die size of 276 mm². This yields a transistor density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture using the Polaris 23 chip. It is fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process node, containing 2,200 million transistors on a die size of 103 mm². This yields a transistor density of 21.4 million transistors per square millimeter.

The NVIDIA chip has more than five times the transistor count and nearly three times the die area. It also has a significantly higher transistor density, which is a direct result of the more advanced 8 nm process. The memory type also reflects the architectural generation gap: GDDR6 versus GDDR5.

Feature-wise, the NVIDIA part includes dedicated ray tracing cores (20) and tensor cores (80), which are absent from the AMD part. These are hardware units designed for specific workloads: ray tracing for real-time graphics and tensor operations for AI and machine learning. The AMD part has no such dedicated units.

The AMD part is a professional workstation GPU, as indicated by its generation name "Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x200)". The NVIDIA part is a mobile consumer GPU from the GeForce 30-series. The release dates confirm the generational gap: the NVIDIA part was released on May 10, 2021, while the AMD part was released on July 1, 2019. The AMD part's predecessor is Radeon Pro GCN and its successor is Radeon Pro Vega. The NVIDIA part's predecessor is GeForce 20 Mobile.

The API support differences are also architectural: the NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD part is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support is 1.4 on NVIDIA versus 1.3 on AMD.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute performance: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 57,915 is 415.8 percent higher than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200's 11,228. Its average benchmark score of 12,940 is 15.2 percent higher than the AMD's 11,228. It also carries a higher percentile ranking (53rd versus 50th), more shading units, more texture units, more raster units, dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores, double the memory bandwidth, and a more advanced process node.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is not without purpose. It is a single-slot professional card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, which is a configuration that the NVIDIA mobile IGP cannot offer. It also consumes less power (65 W versus 75 W) and has a lower launch MSRP of 199 USD, though pricing considerations are outside the scope of this analysis. For a workstation that requires multiple display outputs from a single low-profile card, the AMD part has a physical design advantage that no compute score can offset.

For users who need raw compute, especially OpenCL acceleration, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the only rational choice based on the recorded data. For users who need a multi-display professional workstation card with four outputs and a single-slot footprint, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is the appropriate pick, despite its significantly lower compute performance. The two GPUs serve different physical and architectural niches, and the benchmark data reflects that split clearly.