FirePro W5170M vs Quadro K2200M

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

K2200M
2014
2GB GDDR5
8.96
+58.3%

Quadro K2200M outperforms FirePro W5170M by 58% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking450565
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.800.22
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameGM107Tropo
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date19 July 2014 (9 years ago)2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price$228 $1530

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K2200M has 1627% better value for money than W5170M.

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 cores640640
Core clock speed667 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data925 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Wattno data
Texture fill rate26.6837.00
Floating-point performance853.8 gflops1,184 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro K2200M and FirePro W5170M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
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 amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed5012 MHz4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s72 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Eyefinityno data+
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAccelerationno data+
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_1)
Shader Model55.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA5.0no 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.

K2200M 8.96
+58.3%
W5170M 5.66

Quadro K2200M outperforms FirePro W5170M by 58% based on our aggregated 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%

K2200M 3468
+58.3%
W5170M 2191

Quadro K2200M outperforms FirePro W5170M by 58% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

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 OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

K2200M 10787
+29.5%
W5170M 8330

Quadro K2200M outperforms FirePro W5170M by 29% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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:

Full HD40−45
+48.1%
27
−48.1%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.96 5.66
Recency 19 July 2014 2 October 2015

The Quadro K2200M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5170M 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 K2200M
Quadro K2200M
AMD FirePro W5170M
FirePro W5170M

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.


4.1 20 votes

Rate Quadro K2200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 59 votes

Rate FirePro W5170M 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.