Quadro K2200 vs Radeon R9 M395X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M395X with Quadro K2200, including specs and performance data.

R9 M395X
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
12.23
+43.2%

R9 M395X outperforms K2200 by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking460558
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.40
Power efficiency12.699.78
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameAmethystGM107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (11 years ago)22 July 2014 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$395.75

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores2048640
Core clock speed723 MHz1046 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1124 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt68 Watt
Texture fill rate92.5444.96
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPS1.439 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12840
L1 Cache512 KB320 KB
L2 Cache512 KB2 MB

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data202 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s80.19 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-+
Mantle+-
CUDA-5.0

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R9 M395X 12.23
+43.2%
Quadro K2200 8.54

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 M395X 5117
+43.3%
Samples: 73
Quadro K2200 3572
Samples: 2915

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
Resident Evil 4 Remake 24−27
+56.3%
16−18

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
Far Cry 5 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
Fortnite 70−75
+44%
50−55
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+51.4%
35−40
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+50%
30−33
Valorant 100−110
+52.9%
70−75

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+46.7%
120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
Dota 2 80−85
+50.9%
55−60
Far Cry 5 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
Fortnite 70−75
+44%
50−55
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+51.4%
35−40
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
Metro Exodus 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+50%
30−33
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
Valorant 100−110
+52.9%
70−75

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
Dota 2 80−85
+50.9%
55−60
Far Cry 5 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+51.4%
35−40
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+50%
30−33
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
Valorant 100−110
+52.9%
70−75

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+44%
50−55

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+50%
16−18
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+55%
60−65
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+50%
12−14
Metro Exodus 14−16
+50%
10−11
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+54%
50−55
Valorant 110−120
+47.5%
80−85

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
Far Cry 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+70%
10−11

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+50%
18−20

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+50%
16−18
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+75%
4−5
Metro Exodus 8−9
+60%
5−6
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+60%
10−11
Valorant 55−60
+45%
40−45

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+70%
10−11
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
Dota 2 45−50
+50%
30−33
Far Cry 5 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+50%
14−16
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+75%
4−5
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+50%
8−9

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+50%
8−9

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.23 8.54
Recency 5 May 2015 22 July 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 68 Watt

R9 M395X has a 43% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 9 months.

Quadro K2200, on the other hand, has 73% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 M395X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M395X is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2200 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4 20 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M395X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 489 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M395X or Quadro K2200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.