Quadro P2200 vs GeForce GTX 965M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 965M SLI with Quadro P2200, including specs and performance data.

GTX 965M SLI
2015
2x 4 GB GDDR5
17.31

P2200 outperforms GTX 965M SLI by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking327239
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data22.23
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameno dataGP106
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 January 2015 (10 years ago)10 June 2019 (5 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores20481280
Core clock speed924 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHz1493 MHz
Number of transistors2x 5200 Million4,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data119.4
Floating-point processing powerno data3.822 TFLOPS
ROPsno data40
TMUsno data80

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
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data201 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5X
Maximum RAM amount2x 4 GB5 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHz1251 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data200.2 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectorsno data4x DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA+6.1

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 HD72
−38.9%
100−110
+38.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
−31%
55−60
+31%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
−31%
55−60
+31%
Battlefield 5 65−70
−37.7%
95−100
+37.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−36.4%
75−80
+36.4%
Fortnite 90−95
−33.3%
120−130
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−34.3%
90−95
+34.3%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
−33.3%
80−85
+33.3%
Valorant 120−130
−39.5%
180−190
+39.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
−31%
55−60
+31%
Battlefield 5 65−70
−37.7%
95−100
+37.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
−38.1%
290−300
+38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Dota 2 95−100
−31.3%
130−140
+31.3%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−36.4%
75−80
+36.4%
Fortnite 90−95
−33.3%
120−130
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−34.3%
90−95
+34.3%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
−37.1%
85−90
+37.1%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
−33.3%
80−85
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%
Valorant 120−130
−39.5%
180−190
+39.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
−37.7%
95−100
+37.7%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Dota 2 95−100
−31.3%
130−140
+31.3%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−36.4%
75−80
+36.4%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−34.3%
90−95
+34.3%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
−33.3%
80−85
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%
Valorant 120−130
−39.5%
180−190
+39.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
−33.3%
120−130
+33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
−34.5%
160−170
+34.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Metro Exodus 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−37.5%
220−230
+37.5%
Valorant 160−170
−35.8%
220−230
+35.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
−30.4%
60−65
+30.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−37.5%
55−60
+37.5%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
Valorant 90−95
−33.3%
120−130
+33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Dota 2 55−60
−31.6%
75−80
+31.6%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−25%
35−40
+25%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%

This is how GTX 965M SLI and Quadro P2200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P2200 is 39% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.31 24.27
Recency 5 January 2015 10 June 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm

Quadro P2200 has a 40.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 965M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 965M SLI is a notebook card while Quadro P2200 is a workstation one.

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 965M SLI
GeForce GTX 965M SLI
NVIDIA Quadro P2200
Quadro P2200

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.


3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 965M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 386 votes

Rate Quadro P2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 965M SLI or Quadro P2200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.