Tegra X1 vs Quadro K2200
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 473 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.00 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.35 | no data |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | GM107 | GM20B |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 22 July 2014 (10 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $395.75 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 1046 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,870 million | 2,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 20 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 68 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 44.96 | 16.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.439 TFLOPS | 0.512 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 16 |
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 | IGP |
| Length | 202 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1253 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 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 | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
| CUDA | 5.0 | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 20 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 68 Watt | 15 Watt |
Tegra X1 has a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 353.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Quadro K2200 and Tegra X1. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Quadro K2200 is a workstation graphics card while Tegra X1 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
