AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single direct benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and the NVIDIA Tesla M10: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11,228 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla M10 scores 10,318 points. The AMD card wins this head-to-head matchup by a delta of 8.8%. This is a meaningful margin in a compute workload, indicating that the Radeon Pro WX 3200 delivers noticeably higher OpenCL throughput than the Tesla M10, despite the Tesla card having a larger memory pool.

The average benchmark score for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is 11,228, which places it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Tesla M10, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 9,724, sitting at the 47th percentile. When looking at the nearest rivals for the AMD card, the data shows a tight cluster: the AMD FirePro W4300 scores 11,225 (a 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M scores 11,261 (a 0.3% deficit for the AMD card), and both the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q score 11,088 (a 1.3% advantage for the AMD card). The Radeon Pro WX 3200 is essentially neck-and-neck with these competitors, all within a narrow band of performance.

For the Tesla M10, the nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition. The NVIDIA Tesla C2070 scores 9,716 (a 0.1% advantage for the Tesla M10), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 scores 9,780 (a 0.6% deficit), the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 scores 9,665 (a 0.6% advantage), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 scores 9,653 (a 0.7% advantage). The Tesla M10 sits in a competitive neighborhood, but it is clearly a step below the Radeon Pro WX 3200 in aggregate compute performance.

The OpenCL delta of 8.8% is the single most important number in the comparison. It shows that the AMD card is not just marginally ahead, but comfortably ahead in this specific workload. The Tesla M10 does have a Vulkan benchmark score recorded at 9,130, but the Radeon Pro WX 3200 has no Vulkan score in the database, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible from the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and different manufacturers. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is built on the Polaris 23 chip using the GCN 4.0 architecture, falling into the Radeon Pro Polaris (WX x200) generation. It is manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The chip contains 2,200 million transistors on a die size of 103 mm², yielding a transistor density of 21.4 million transistors per square millimeter.

The NVIDIA Tesla M10, in contrast, uses the GM107 chip with the Maxwell architecture, belonging to the Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) generation. It is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 1,870 million transistors on a larger die size of 148 mm², resulting in a lower transistor density of 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The process node difference is stark: 14 nm versus 28 nm. The AMD chip packs more transistors into a smaller physical area, which explains its higher density figure.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) and a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. The Tesla M10 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 128-bit bus, but with memory clocked at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) and a lower bandwidth of 83.20 GB/s. So the AMD card has a bandwidth advantage of roughly 13 GB/s, while the Tesla card has double the memory capacity.

Both cards have 640 shading units and 16 ROPs, but they differ in texture mapping units. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 32 TMUs, while the Tesla M10 has 40 TMUs. This gives the Tesla card a higher texture rate of 52.24 GTexel/s compared to 41.44 GTexel/s for the AMD card. Pixel rates are nearly identical: 20.72 GPixel/s for the AMD card versus 20.90 GPixel/s for the Tesla card. Floating-point performance is also close: the AMD card delivers 1.658 TFLOPS in FP32, while the Tesla card delivers 1.672 TFLOPS. The AMD card supports FP16 at 1.658 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Tesla M10 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power and physical characteristics diverge sharply. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a TDP of 65 W, is a single-slot card, requires no power connectors, and lists a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Tesla M10 has a TDP of 225 W, is a dual-slot card, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and lists a suggested PSU of 550 W. The AMD card is also much shorter at 167 mm (6.6 inches) compared to 267 mm (10.5 inches) for the Tesla card.

Bus interface and display outputs also differ. The AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x8 and provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Tesla card uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and has no display outputs at all, reflecting its compute-oriented design. In terms of API support, the AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Tesla M10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vulkan version is higher on the Tesla card, but the DirectX feature level is higher on the AMD card.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins in the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with an 8.8% advantage. This makes it the better choice for OpenCL compute workloads, at least based on the available data. Its higher memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s versus 83.20 GB/s likely contributes to this advantage, as does its more modern 14 nm process and higher transistor density. The AMD card also offers display outputs, making it suitable for tasks that require visual output, whereas the Tesla M10 has none.

The Tesla M10, despite losing the OpenCL comparison, has its own strengths. Its 8 GB memory capacity is double that of the AMD card, which could be advantageous for workloads that need to hold larger datasets in GPU memory. Its higher texture rate of 52.24 GTexel/s and slightly higher FP32 throughput of 1.672 TFLOPS are also recorded advantages. The Tesla card supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer API version than the AMD card's Vulkan 1.3, and it uses a wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface compared to the AMD card's x8.

The power draw difference is substantial: the Radeon Pro WX 3200 draws only 65 W, while the Tesla M10 draws 225 W. For environments where power efficiency matters, the AMD card is clearly superior. The AMD card also has a lower suggested PSU rating of 250 W versus 550 W, and it requires no auxiliary power connectors.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 11,228 against the NVIDIA Tesla M10's 10,318, a delta of 8.8%.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the NVIDIA Tesla M10 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, both on 128-bit buses.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has a TDP of 65 W, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The NVIDIA Tesla M10 has a TDP of 225 W, requires one 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA Tesla M10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), a lower feature level.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla M10 have display outputs?

A: No, the Tesla M10 has no display outputs. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: How do the cards compare in texture and pixel rates?

A: The AMD card has a texture rate of 41.44 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 20.72 GPixel/s. The Tesla M10 has a higher texture rate of 52.24 GTexel/s and a marginally higher pixel rate of 20.90 GPixel/s.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case. For OpenCL compute performance, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is the stronger card, delivering an 8.8% higher score in the head-to-head benchmark. Its lower TDP of 65 W, lack of power connectors, and single-slot design also make it far easier to integrate into systems with modest power budgets. The presence of four mini-DisplayPort outputs means it can drive displays, which the Tesla M10 cannot.

The NVIDIA Tesla M10, however, offers double the memory capacity at 8 GB, a higher texture rate, and a marginally higher FP32 throughput. Its wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and newer Vulkan 1.4 support are also recorded advantages. The Tesla card is positioned for server or compute environments where display output is unnecessary and memory capacity is prioritized over raw OpenCL throughput.

For a workstation user needing display output, lower power draw, and better OpenCL performance, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 is the data-backed choice. For a compute-focused deployment that requires 8 GB of memory and can tolerate 225 W of power draw, the Tesla M10 has its own rationale, though it trails in the single benchmark where both are measured. The percentile data reinforces this: the AMD card sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the Tesla M10 sits at the 47th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | NVIDIA Tesla M10 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Polaris 23 | GM107 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |

| Process node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 1,870 million |

| Die size | 103 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor density | 21.4M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) |

| Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 83.20 GB/s |

| TMUs | 32 | 40 |

| Texture rate | 41.44 GTexel/s | 52.24 GTexel/s |

| Pixel rate | 20.72 GPixel/s | 20.90 GPixel/s |

| FP32 | 1.658 TFLOPS | 1.672 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1.658 TFLOPS (1:1) | None |

| TDP | 65 W | 225 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Length | 167 mm (6.6 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Release date | 2019-07-01 | 2016-05-17 |

| Launch MSRP | 199 USD | None |