GeForce 210 Rev. 2 vs Quadro K2200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking473not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.00no data
Power efficiency9.35no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGM107GT218
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)12 October 2009 (15 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 cores64016
Core clock speed1046 MHz520 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt31 Watt
Texture fill rate44.964.160
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPS0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs408

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 2.0 x16
Length202 mm168 mm
Width1-slot1-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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.19 GB/s6.4 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.01.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 July 2014 12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 31 Watt

Quadro K2200 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

210 Rev. 2, on the other hand, has 119.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K2200 and GeForce 210 Rev. 2. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K2200 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 210 Rev. 2 is a desktop 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 Quadro K2200
Quadro K2200
NVIDIA GeForce 210 Rev. 2
GeForce 210 Rev. 2

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.


3.7 411 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 73 votes

Rate GeForce 210 Rev. 2 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.