Quadro FX 380M vs Quadro M2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2200 and Quadro FX 380M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M2200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
10.98
+3442%

M2200 outperforms FX 380M by a whopping 3442% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4321332
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.770.86
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGM206GT218
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)7 January 2010 (15 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 cores102416
Core clock speed695 MHz606 MHz
Boost clock speed1036 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate66.304.848
Floating-point processing power2.122 TFLOPS0.04698 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs648

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1377 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/s12.64 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.

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+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.

DirectX1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.2+

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.

Quadro M2200 10.98
+3442%
FX 380M 0.31

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.

Quadro M2200 4244
+3437%
FX 380M 120

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 HD43
+4200%
1−2
−4200%
4K14-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Fortnite 60−65
+6000%
1−2
−6000%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Valorant 95−100
+269%
24−27
−269%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+1085%
12−14
−1085%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Dota 2 70−75
+630%
10−11
−630%
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Fortnite 60−65
+6000%
1−2
−6000%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+825%
4−5
−825%
Valorant 95−100
+269%
24−27
−269%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Dota 2 70−75
+630%
10−11
−630%
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+400%
4−5
−400%
Valorant 95−100
+269%
24−27
−269%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60−65
+6000%
1−2
−6000%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+3850%
2−3
−3850%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Metro Exodus 12−14 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+2450%
2−3
−2450%
Valorant 110−120
+3700%
3−4
−3700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 4−5 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13 0−1
Valorant 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Dota 2 35−40
+3700%
1−2
−3700%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

This is how Quadro M2200 and FX 380M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is 4200% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M2200 is 2650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro M2200 surpassed FX 380M in all 33 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.98 0.31
Recency 11 January 2017 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 25 Watt

Quadro M2200 has a 3441.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

FX 380M, on the other hand, has 120% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 380M 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 M2200
Quadro M2200
NVIDIA Quadro FX 380M
Quadro FX 380M

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.


3.7 380 votes

Rate Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate Quadro FX 380M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2200 or Quadro FX 380M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.