Radeon Pro WX 4130 vs Quadro K2200M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2200M and Radeon Pro WX 4130, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

K2200M
2014
2 GB GDDR5, 65 Watt
9.09
+54.3%

K2200M outperforms Pro WX 4130 by an impressive 54% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking487599
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.618.10
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Baffin
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date19 July 2014 (10 years ago)1 March 2017 (7 years ago)

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 speed667 MHz1002 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1053 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate26.6842.12
Floating-point processing power0.8538 TFLOPS1.348 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8
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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s96 GB/s
Shared memory--

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
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
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.

K2200M 9.09
+54.3%
Pro WX 4130 5.89

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.

K2200M 3501
+54.4%
Pro WX 4130 2268

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.09 5.89
Recency 19 July 2014 1 March 2017
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 50 Watt

K2200M has a 54.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Pro WX 4130, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 30% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K2200M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 4130 in performance tests.

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 Radeon Pro WX 4130
Radeon Pro WX 4130

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 39 votes

Rate Quadro K2200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 34 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 4130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2200M or Radeon Pro WX 4130, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.