Radeon PRO W7900 vs Quadro K2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2200 and Radeon PRO W7900, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K2200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 68 Watt
9.24

PRO W7900 outperforms K2200 by a whopping 720% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking47613
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.2116.79
Power efficiency9.3117.61
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGM107Navi 31
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$395.75 $3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7900 has 423% better value for money than Quadro K2200.

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 cores6406144
Core clock speed1046 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHz2495 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt295 Watt
Texture fill rate44.96958.1
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPS61.32 TFLOPS
ROPs16192
TMUs40384
Ray Tracing Coresno data96

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 4.0 x16
Length202 mm280 mm
Width1-slot3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB48 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.19 GB/s864.0 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 DisplayPort3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA5.0-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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 9.24
PRO W7900 75.81
+720%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

Quadro K2200 3558
PRO W7900 29204
+721%

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 9.24 75.81
Recency 22 July 2014 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 295 Watt

Quadro K2200 has 333.8% lower power consumption.

PRO W7900, on the other hand, has a 720.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200 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
AMD Radeon PRO W7900
Radeon PRO W7900

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.


3.7 420 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 75 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7900 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.