Quadro P3200 vs GeForce GTX 275

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 275 with Quadro P3200, including specs and performance data.

GTX 275
2009
896 MB GDDR3, 219 Watt
3.67

Quadro P3200 outperforms GTX 275 by a whopping 528% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking677223
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.353.65
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGT200BN18E-Q1
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date15 January 2009 (15 years ago)27 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data
Current price$82 (0.3x MSRP)$2122

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P3200 has 943% better value for money than GTX 275.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2401792
CUDA cores240no data
Core clock speed633 MHz708 - 1202 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1228 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)219 Watt78 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate50.6 billion/sec172.8
Floating-point performance673.9 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 275 and Quadro P3200 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount896 MB6 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1134 MHz7008 MHz
Memory bandwidth127.0 GB/s168.3 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.04.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 275 3.67
Quadro P3200 23.06
+528%

Quadro P3200 outperforms GeForce GTX 275 by 528% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 275 1416
Quadro P3200 8907
+529%

Quadro P3200 outperforms GeForce GTX 275 by 529% in Passmark.

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 HD12−14
−592%
83
+592%
4K4−5
−600%
28
+600%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−522%
230−240
+522%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65
−515%
400−450
+515%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−525%
250−260
+525%
Battlefield 5 75−80
−492%
450−500
+492%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−517%
290−300
+517%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−522%
230−240
+522%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−474%
350−400
+474%
Forza Horizon 4 95
−479%
550−600
+479%
Hitman 3 45−50
−509%
280−290
+509%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−504%
550−600
+504%
Metro Exodus 75−80
−492%
450−500
+492%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−465%
350−400
+465%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
−477%
450−500
+477%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−497%
400−450
+497%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 56
−525%
350−400
+525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−525%
250−260
+525%
Battlefield 5 75−80
−492%
450−500
+492%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−517%
290−300
+517%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−522%
230−240
+522%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−474%
350−400
+474%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−488%
600−650
+488%
Hitman 3 45−50
−509%
280−290
+509%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−504%
550−600
+504%
Metro Exodus 75−80
−492%
450−500
+492%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−465%
350−400
+465%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
−477%
450−500
+477%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
−495%
500−550
+495%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−497%
400−450
+497%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40
−525%
250−260
+525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−525%
250−260
+525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−517%
290−300
+517%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−522%
230−240
+522%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Forza Horizon 4 72
−525%
450−500
+525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−504%
550−600
+504%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
−477%
450−500
+477%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
−509%
280−290
+509%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−497%
400−450
+497%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−465%
350−400
+465%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−514%
270−280
+514%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−525%
300−310
+525%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−525%
150−160
+525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−513%
190−200
+513%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−507%
85−90
+507%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−515%
240−250
+515%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−509%
280−290
+509%
Hitman 3 27−30
−493%
160−170
+493%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−517%
290−300
+517%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−514%
270−280
+514%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
−500%
300−310
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−507%
170−180
+507%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−488%
100−105
+488%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−505%
230−240
+505%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−509%
140−150
+509%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Hitman 3 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
−507%
170−180
+507%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−507%
85−90
+507%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−515%
80−85
+515%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−515%
80−85
+515%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−525%
200−210
+525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
−500%
60−65
+500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−500%
120−130
+500%

This is how GTX 275 and Quadro P3200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P3200 is 592% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P3200 is 600% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.67 23.06
Recency 15 January 2009 27 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 219 Watt 78 Watt

The Quadro P3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 275 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 275 is a desktop card while Quadro P3200 is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275
GeForce GTX 275
NVIDIA Quadro P3200
Quadro P3200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 132 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 275 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 246 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.