Radeon HD 7770 vs Quadro K2200

Place in performance ranking	445	569
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.08	0.39
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code name	GM107	Cape Verde
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	22 July 2014 (9 years ago)	15 February 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$395.75	$129.99
Current price	$313 (0.8x MSRP)	$300 (2.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K2200 has 690% better value for money than HD 7770.

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 cores	640	640
Core clock speed	1046 MHz	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	68 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	44.96	40.00
Floating-point performance	1,439 gflops	no data

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	202 mm	210 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5012 MHz	4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80.19 GB/s	72 GB/s
Shared memory	no 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinity	no data	+
HDMI	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	5.0	no data

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.

Quadro K2200 9.19
+63.5%

HD 7770 5.62

Quadro K2200 outperforms Radeon HD 7770 by 64% 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%

Quadro K2200 3550
+63.6%

HD 7770 2170

Quadro K2200 outperforms Radeon HD 7770 by 64% 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:

900p	75−80 +59.6%	47 −59.6%
Full HD	80−85 +56.9%	51 −56.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

+55.6%

9−10
−55.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +60%	14−16 −60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +50%	16−18 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +60%	14−16 −60%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +57.9%	18−20 −57.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +45.8%	24−27 −45.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +60%	14−16 −60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +50%	16−18 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +60%	14−16 −60%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +57.9%	18−20 −57.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +45.8%	24−27 −45.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +48.1%	27−30 −48.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +57.9%	18−20 −57.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +45.8%	24−27 −45.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27
+60%

14−16

−60%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +45.5%	10−12 −45.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Hitman 3	16−18 +60%	10−11 −60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +50%	12−14 −50%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+60%

10−11

−60%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Hitman 3	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+50%

6−7

−50%

This is how Quadro K2200 and HD 7770 compete in popular games:

Quadro K2200 is 60% faster in 900p
Quadro K2200 is 57% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.19	5.62
Recency	22 July 2014	15 February 2012
Cost	$395.75	$129.99
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Power consumption (TDP)	68 Watt	80 Watt