Radeon Sky 500 vs Quadro K2200
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro K2200 and Radeon Sky 500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Sky 500 outperforms K2200 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 489 | 421 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.34 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.33 | 5.58 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) |
| GPU code name | GM107 | Pitcairn |
| Market segment | Workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 22 July 2014 (10 years ago) | 27 March 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $395.75 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 cores | 640 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 1046 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,870 million | 2,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 68 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 44.96 | 76.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.439 TFLOPS | 2.432 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32 |
| TMUs | 40 | 80 |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 202 mm | 242 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Form factor | no data | full height / full length |
| 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 | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1253 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 154 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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort count | no data | 1 |
| Dual-link DVI support | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D 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 | - |
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.
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.
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 | 7.99 | 10.54 |
| Recency | 22 July 2014 | 27 March 2013 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 68 Watt | 150 Watt |
Quadro K2200 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 120.6% lower power consumption.
Sky 500, on the other hand, has a 31.9% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon Sky 500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
