Quadro K2200M vs GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile with Quadro K2200M, including specs and performance data.
980 SLI Mobile outperforms K2200M by a whopping 333% 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 | 145 | 538 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.50 | 9.97 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Maxwell (2014−2017) |
| GPU code name | N16E-GXX SLI | GM107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 22 September 2015 (10 years ago) | 19 July 2014 (11 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 cores | 4096 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1126 MHz | 667 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10400 Million | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 26.68 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.8538 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 40 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 2 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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3500 MHz | 1253 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 80 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 data | No outputs |
| Display Port | no data | 1.2 |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision Pro | no data | + |
| Mosaic | no data | + |
| nView Display Management | no data | + |
| Optimus | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | + |
| CUDA | + | 5.0 |
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 | 137
+357%
| 30−35
−357%
|
| 4K | 68
+386%
| 14−16
−386%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+356%
|
45−50
−356%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+372%
|
18−20
−372%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+374%
|
27−30
−374%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+356%
|
45−50
−356%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+372%
|
18−20
−372%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130
+344%
|
27−30
−344%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+337%
|
27−30
−337%
|
| Fortnite | 160−170
+360%
|
35−40
−360%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+377%
|
30−33
−377%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+333%
|
27−30
−333%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+390%
|
30−33
−390%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+338%
|
50−55
−338%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+374%
|
27−30
−374%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+356%
|
45−50
−356%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+363%
|
60−65
−363%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+372%
|
18−20
−372%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+377%
|
30−33
−377%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130
+344%
|
27−30
−344%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+337%
|
27−30
−337%
|
| Fortnite | 160−170
+360%
|
35−40
−360%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+377%
|
30−33
−377%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+333%
|
27−30
−333%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+359%
|
27−30
−359%
|
| Metro Exodus | 85−90
+383%
|
18−20
−383%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+390%
|
30−33
−390%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 132
+340%
|
30−33
−340%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+338%
|
50−55
−338%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+374%
|
27−30
−374%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+372%
|
18−20
−372%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+377%
|
30−33
−377%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130
+344%
|
27−30
−344%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+337%
|
27−30
−337%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+377%
|
30−33
−377%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+390%
|
30−33
−390%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+363%
|
16−18
−363%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+338%
|
50−55
−338%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 160−170
+360%
|
35−40
−360%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+333%
|
21−24
−333%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260
+369%
|
55−60
−369%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+375%
|
16−18
−375%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+342%
|
12−14
−342%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+338%
|
40−45
−338%
|
| Valorant | 250−260
+356%
|
55−60
−356%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 95−100
+352%
|
21−24
−352%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+367%
|
9−10
−367%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 85−90
+389%
|
18−20
−389%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 85−90
+394%
|
18−20
−394%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100−110
+333%
|
24−27
−333%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+386%
|
14−16
−386%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 95−100
+362%
|
21−24
−362%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+367%
|
9−10
−367%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+339%
|
18−20
−339%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+371%
|
7−8
−371%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 51
+410%
|
10−11
−410%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+350%
|
50−55
−350%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+392%
|
12−14
−392%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+367%
|
9−10
−367%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+375%
|
4−5
−375%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+346%
|
24−27
−346%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 45−50
+350%
|
10−11
−350%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+380%
|
10−11
−380%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+393%
|
14−16
−393%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+380%
|
10−11
−380%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 45−50
+370%
|
10−11
−370%
|
This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and K2200M compete in popular games:
- GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 357% faster in 1080p
- GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 386% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 36.38 | 8.41 |
| Recency | 22 September 2015 | 19 July 2014 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 65 Watt |
GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 332.6% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.
K2200M, on the other hand, has 407.7% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2200M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
