Quadro M2000M vs Quadro M2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2200 and Quadro M2000M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M2200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
11.03
+23.1%

M2200 outperforms M2000M by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking422487
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.7711.19
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGM206GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (7 years ago)3 December 2015 (9 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 cores1024640
Core clock speed695 MHz1029 MHz
Boost clock speed1036 MHz1098 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate66.3043.92
Floating-point processing power2.122 TFLOPS1.405 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs6440

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 sizelargelarge
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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1377 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/s80 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 Port1.21.2

Supported technologies

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

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA5.25.0

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. 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 11.03
+23.1%
M2000M 8.96

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • GeekBench 5 OpenCL
    • GeekBench 5 Vulkan
    • GeekBench 5 CUDA
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Maya
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Catia
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Creo
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Medical
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

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 4250
+23.2%
M2000M 3450

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.

Quadro M2200 7372
+43.3%
M2000M 5143

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.

Quadro M2200 24622
+19.7%
M2000M 20567

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.

Quadro M2200 5850
+40.7%
M2000M 4157

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.

Quadro M2200 37796
+26.9%
M2000M 29795

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.

Quadro M2200 13288
+35.8%
M2000M 9788

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.

Quadro M2200 15604
+63.7%
M2000M 9534

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.

Quadro M2200 12812
+22.7%
M2000M 10438

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Quadro M2200 47
+31.4%
M2000M 36

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Quadro M2200 86
+22.8%
M2000M 70

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Quadro M2200 58
+75%
M2000M 33

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Quadro M2200 72
+57.2%
M2000M 46

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Quadro M2200 69
+72.5%
M2000M 40

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Quadro M2200 25
+67.3%
M2000M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Quadro M2200 33
+49.8%
M2000M 22

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Quadro M2200 5
+62.5%
M2000M 3

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

Quadro M2200 33
+49.8%
M2000M 22

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

Quadro M2200 47
+31.4%
M2000M 36

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

Quadro M2200 72
+57.2%
M2000M 46

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

Quadro M2200 86
+22.8%
M2000M 70

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

Quadro M2200 58
+75%
M2000M 33

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

Quadro M2200 69
+72.5%
M2000M 40

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

Quadro M2200 25
+67.3%
M2000M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

Quadro M2200 5.2
+62.5%
M2000M 3.2

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 HD44
+22.2%
36
−22.2%
4K14
+16.7%
12
−16.7%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+24%
24−27
−24%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+21.7%
60−65
−21.7%
Hitman 3 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+18%
50−55
−18%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+24%
24−27
−24%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+10%
60−65
−10%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+24%
24−27
−24%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+21.7%
60−65
−21.7%
Hitman 3 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+18%
50−55
−18%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+24%
24−27
−24%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−148%
72
+148%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+10%
60−65
−10%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+21.7%
60−65
−21.7%
Hitman 3 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+18%
50−55
−18%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+42.9%
14
−42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+10%
60−65
−10%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+24%
24−27
−24%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+34.2%
35−40
−34.2%
Hitman 3 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+21.1%
18−20
−21.1%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+21.1%
55−60
−21.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+38.9%
35−40
−38.9%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+44.4%
9
−44.4%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%

This is how Quadro M2200 and M2000M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is 22% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M2200 is 17% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M2200 is 60% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the M2000M is 148% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • M2000M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.03 8.96
Recency 11 January 2017 3 December 2015

Quadro M2200 has a 23.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000M 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 M2200
Quadro M2200
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
Quadro M2000M

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.


3.7
376 votes

Rate Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Quadro M2000M 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.