GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro M2200

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

Quadro M2200
11.06

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 173% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking388170
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Value for money1.0625.04
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameN17P-Q3Turing TU116
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date13 January 2017 (7 years old)14 March 2019 (5 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$219
Current price$1967 $252 (1.2x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1660 has 2262% better value for money than Quadro M2200.

Technical specs

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 cores10241408
Core clock speed694 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors1870 Million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate66.30157.1

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro M2200 and GeForce GTX 1660 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

Memory

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 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed5508 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/s192.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMIno data+
Display Port1.2no data

Technologies

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

Optimus+no data
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API support

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.27.5

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.

Quadro M2200 11.06
GTX 1660 30.17
+173%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 173% in our combined 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%

Quadro M2200 4285
GTX 1660 11692
+173%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 173% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Quadro M2200 24622
GTX 1660 71229
+189%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 189% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Quadro M2200 7372
GTX 1660 21131
+187%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 187% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Quadro M2200 5850
GTX 1660 14055
+140%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 140% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Quadro M2200 37796
GTX 1660 80889
+114%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 114% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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%

Quadro M2200 13006
GTX 1660 57413
+341%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 341% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

Quadro M2200 289176
GTX 1660 524782
+81.5%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 81% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Quadro M2200 16055
GTX 1660 55668
+247%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 247% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

Quadro M2200 12812
GTX 1660 60172
+370%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 370% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 47
GTX 1660 120
+156%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 156% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 86
+74.8%
GTX 1660 49

Quadro M2200 outperforms GeForce GTX 1660 by 75% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 58
+576%
GTX 1660 9

Quadro M2200 outperforms GeForce GTX 1660 by 576% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 72
+21%
GTX 1660 60

Quadro M2200 outperforms GeForce GTX 1660 by 21% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 69
+69.6%
GTX 1660 40

Quadro M2200 outperforms GeForce GTX 1660 by 70% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 25
GTX 1660 27
+10.2%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 10% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 33
GTX 1660 63
+92.7%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 93% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

Quadro M2200 5
GTX 1660 6
+11.5%

GeForce GTX 1660 outperforms Quadro M2200 by 12% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.

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 HD45
−91.1%
86
+91.1%
1440p16−18
−200%
48
+200%
4K14
−100%
28
+100%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−318%
71
+318%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−148%
55−60
+148%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−247%
59
+247%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−147%
90−95
+147%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−286%
112
+286%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−241%
58
+241%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−257%
100
+257%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
−217%
95
+217%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−238%
132
+238%
Hitman 3 27−30
−279%
110
+279%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−257%
82
+257%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
−284%
73
+284%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−304%
93
+304%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
−290%
78
+290%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−148%
55−60
+148%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−147%
42
+147%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−147%
90−95
+147%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−193%
85
+193%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−176%
47
+176%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−229%
92
+229%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
−197%
89
+197%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−215%
123
+215%
Hitman 3 27−30
−210%
90
+210%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−165%
61
+165%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−235%
57
+235%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
−111%
40
+111%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−239%
78
+239%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
−176%
102
+176%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
−230%
66
+230%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−148%
55−60
+148%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−118%
37
+118%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−147%
90−95
+147%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−135%
40
+135%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−207%
86
+207%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
−173%
82
+173%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−151%
98
+151%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−185%
57
+185%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
−45%
29
+45%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−256%
57
+256%
Hitman 3 16−18
−235%
57
+235%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−135%
40
+135%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−267%
33
+267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−213%
25
+213%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−243%
48
+243%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
−200%
30−35
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−286%
27
+286%
Battlefield 5 20−22
−230%
65−70
+230%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−380%
24
+380%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−228%
59
+228%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−211%
59
+211%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−280%
76
+280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−290%
35−40
+290%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−217%
19
+217%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−357%
32
+357%
Hitman 3 10−11
−210%
31
+210%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
−22.2%
11
+22.2%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−400%
20
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−300%
24
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−169%
35
+169%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−233%
20−22
+233%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−200%
15
+200%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−260%
35−40
+260%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10
+900%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−233%
30
+233%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
−182%
31
+182%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−257%
50
+257%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−200%
12
+200%

This is how Quadro M2200 and GTX 1660 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 91.1% faster than Quadro M2200

1440p resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 200% faster than Quadro M2200

4K resolution:

  • GTX 1660 is 100% faster than Quadro M2200

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1660 is 900% faster than the Quadro M2200.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 1660 surpassed Quadro M2200 in all 68 of our tests.

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 11.06 30.17
Recency 13 January 2017 14 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 120 Watt

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2200 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro M2200
Quadro M2200
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 264 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 4595 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.