Radeon RX 640 OEM vs Quadro K2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking474not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.01no data
Power efficiency9.44no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Polaris 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)9 April 2020 (4 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 MHz1295 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate44.9651.80
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPS1.658 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 x8
Length202 mmno data
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.19 GB/s96 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 DisplayPort 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.7 (6.4)
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA5.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 July 2014 9 April 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 50 Watt

RX 640 OEM has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 36% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K2200 and Radeon RX 640 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K2200 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 640 OEM 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
AMD Radeon RX 640 OEM
Radeon RX 640 OEM

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.


3.7 414 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 9 votes

Rate Radeon RX 640 OEM 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.