Quadro M2200 vs M5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

Quadro M5000
2015
8 GB 256-bit, 150 Watt
24.35
+121%

M5000 outperforms M2200 by a whopping 121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking208394
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.210.99
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGM204N17P-Q3
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date29 June 2015 (8 years ago)13 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,856.99 no data
Current price$823 (0.3x MSRP)$1967

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro M5000 has 729% better value for money than Quadro M2200.

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 cores20481024
Core clock speed861 MHz694 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz1038 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1870 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate132.966.30
Floating-point performance4,252 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M5000 and Quadro M2200 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width2" (5.1 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone
SLI options+no 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 type256 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed6612 MHz5508 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 211 GB/s88 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 ConnectorsDVI-I DP DP DP DP 3-pin StereoNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Syncno data
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimusno data+
ECC (Error Correcting Code)+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
3D Stereono data+
Mosaic++
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Display Managementno data+
nView Desktop Management+no data
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model55.0
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA5.25.2

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 M5000 24.35
+121%
Quadro M2200 11.01

M5000 outperforms M2200 by 121% based on our aggregate 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 M5000 9412
+121%
Quadro M2200 4256

M5000 outperforms M2200 by 121% 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%

Quadro M5000 28391
+122%
Quadro M2200 12799

M5000 outperforms M2200 by 122% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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 M5000 33026
+110%
Quadro M2200 15742

M5000 outperforms M2200 by 110% 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 M5000 24565
+91.7%
Quadro M2200 12812

M5000 outperforms M2200 by 92% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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 HD90−95
+114%
42
−114%
4K27−30
+108%
13
−108%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.35 11.01
Recency 29 June 2015 13 January 2017
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 55 Watt

The Quadro M5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5000 is a workstation card while Quadro M2200 is a mobile workstation one.


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 M5000
Quadro M5000
NVIDIA Quadro M2200
Quadro M2200

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.


4.3 58 votes

Rate Quadro M5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 287 votes

Rate Quadro M2200 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.