Quadro P2200 vs GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile with Quadro P2200, including specs and performance data.
RTX 2060 Mobile outperforms P2200 by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 245 | 284 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 18.11 | 23.36 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | TU106 | GP106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 29 January 2019 (7 years ago) | 10 June 2019 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1920 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 960 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1493 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 10,800 million | 4,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 144.0 | 119.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.608 TFLOPS | 3.822 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 40 |
| TMUs | 120 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | 240 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 30 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 1.9 MB | 480 KB |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 1280 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 201 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 5 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 160 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 1251 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 200.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 6.1 |
| DLSS | + | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 104 | 85−90
−18.3%
|
| 1440p | 66
+20%
| 55−60 |
| 4K | 42
+20%
| 35−40 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 75−80
+28.3%
|
60−65 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+28.3%
|
120−130 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+20%
|
50−55 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 65−70
+21.8%
|
55−60 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 75−80
+28.3%
|
60−65 |
| Battlefield 5 | 104
+22.4%
|
85−90 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+28.3%
|
120−130 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+20%
|
50−55 |
| Far Cry 5 | 96
+20%
|
80−85 |
| Fortnite | 162
+24.6%
|
130−140 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 108
+20%
|
90−95 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 171
+22.1%
|
140−150 |
| Valorant | 223
+23.9%
|
180−190 |
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 75−80
+28.3%
|
60−65 |
| Battlefield 5 | 104
+22.4%
|
85−90 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+28.3%
|
120−130 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 260−270
+21.8%
|
220−230 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+20%
|
50−55 |
| Dota 2 | 118
+24.2%
|
95−100 |
| Far Cry 5 | 91
+21.3%
|
75−80 |
| Fortnite | 144
+20%
|
120−130 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 107
+18.9%
|
90−95 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 90
+20%
|
75−80 |
| Metro Exodus | 56
+24.4%
|
45−50 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 147
+22.5%
|
120−130 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 111
+23.3%
|
90−95 |
| Valorant | 196
+22.5%
|
160−170 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 98
+22.5%
|
80−85 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+20%
|
50−55 |
| Dota 2 | 112
+24.4%
|
90−95 |
| Far Cry 5 | 84
+20%
|
70−75 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 88
+25.7%
|
70−75 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 112
+24.4%
|
90−95 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 60
+20%
|
50−55 |
| Valorant | 123
+23%
|
100−105 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 113
+18.9%
|
95−100 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+22%
|
50−55 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 190−200
+20%
|
160−170 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 50−55
+30%
|
40−45 |
| Metro Exodus | 35
+29.6%
|
27−30 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+25%
|
140−150 |
| Valorant | 212
+24.7%
|
170−180 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 75
+25%
|
60−65 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+33.3%
|
21−24 |
| Far Cry 5 | 63
+26%
|
50−55 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+20%
|
60−65 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+31.4%
|
35−40 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 74
+23.3%
|
60−65 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 21−24
+22.2%
|
18−20 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+33.3%
|
21−24 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 50−55
+32.5%
|
40−45 |
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+33.3%
|
18−20 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 39
+30%
|
30−33 |
| Valorant | 171
+22.1%
|
140−150 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 42
+20%
|
35−40 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+33.3%
|
21−24 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11 |
| Dota 2 | 87
+24.3%
|
70−75 |
| Far Cry 5 | 33
+22.2%
|
27−30 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+20%
|
40−45 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 38
+26.7%
|
30−33 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 34
+25.9%
|
27−30 |
This is how RTX 2060 Mobile and Quadro P2200 compete in popular games:
- RTX 2060 Mobile is 22% faster in 1080p
- RTX 2060 Mobile is 20% faster in 1440p
- RTX 2060 Mobile is 20% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 26.88 | 22.61 |
| Recency | 29 January 2019 | 10 June 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 5 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 75 Watt |
RTX 2060 Mobile has a 19% higher aggregate performance score, a 20% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
Quadro P2200, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 35% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2200 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P2200 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
