GRID M3-3020 vs Quadro K2200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2200 and GRID M3-3020, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K2200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 68 Watt
9.20
+20.1%

K2200 outperforms GRID M3-3020 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking471519
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.00no data
Power efficiency9.40no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGM107GM107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)18 May 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$395.75 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores640640
Core clock speed1046 MHz1033 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHz1306 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Wattno data
Texture fill rate44.9652.24
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPS1.672 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4040

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length202 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1300 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.19 GB/s83.2 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA5.05.0

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.20 7.66
Recency 22 July 2014 18 May 2016

Quadro K2200 has a 20.1% higher aggregate performance score.

GRID M3-3020, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The Quadro K2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M3-3020 in performance tests.


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 Quadro K2200
Quadro K2200
NVIDIA GRID M3-3020
GRID M3-3020

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.


3.7 410 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 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.