Quadro K2200M vs Quadro P5000

Place in the ranking	166	482
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.21	no data
Power efficiency	12.48	9.56
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	GP104	GM107
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 October 2016 (8 years ago)	19 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	2048	640
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	667 MHz
Boost clock speed	1733 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	277.3	26.68
Floating-point processing power	8.873 TFLOPS	0.8538 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	160	40

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1127 MHz	1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192 GB/s	80 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	No outputs
Display Port	1.4	1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	no 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.

DirectX	12	12
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
CUDA	6.1	5.0

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 P5000 32.52
+262%

K2200M 8.99

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 P5000 12545
+262%

K2200M 3468

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 P5000 52657
+388%

K2200M 10787

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 HD	98 +263%	27−30 −263%
4K	42 +320%	10−12 −320%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	25.50	no data
4K	59.50	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

55−60
+293%

14−16

−293%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +289%	18−20 −289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +300%	14−16 −300%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +289%	27−30 −289%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +267%	18−20 −267%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +293%	14−16 −293%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +300%	18−20 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +290%	21−24 −290%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +282%	45−50 −282%
Hitman 3	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +303%	35−40 −303%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +300%	27−30 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +281%	21−24 −281%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +280%	30−33 −280%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +293%	30−33 −293%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +289%	18−20 −289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +300%	14−16 −300%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +289%	27−30 −289%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +267%	18−20 −267%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +293%	14−16 −293%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +300%	18−20 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +290%	21−24 −290%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +282%	45−50 −282%
Hitman 3	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +303%	35−40 −303%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +300%	27−30 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +281%	21−24 −281%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +280%	30−33 −280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +293%	30−33 −293%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +289%	18−20 −289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +300%	14−16 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +267%	18−20 −267%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +293%	14−16 −293%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +300%	18−20 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +282%	45−50 −282%
Hitman 3	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +303%	35−40 −303%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +280%	30−33 −280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	53 +279%	14−16 −279%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +293%	30−33 −293%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

80−85
+281%

21−24

−281%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +281%	16−18 −281%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +308%	12−14 −308%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +278%	9−10 −278%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +278%	9−10 −278%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +280%	10−11 −280%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +270%	10−11 −270%
Forza Horizon 4	180−190 +272%	50−55 −272%
Hitman 3	40−45 +300%	10−11 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 +283%	18−20 −283%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +281%	16−18 −281%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +317%	18−20 −317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +267%	12−14 −267%
Watch Dogs: Legion	170−180 +278%	45−50 −278%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+293%

14−16

−293%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +300%	8−9 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +271%	7−8 −271%
Hitman 3	24−27 +271%	7−8 −271%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +298%	40−45 −298%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +290%	10−11 −290%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	36 +300%	9−10 −300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +300%	5−6 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +267%	12−14 −267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +320%	10−11 −320%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30

+300%

7−8
−300%

This is how Quadro P5000 and K2200M compete in popular games:

Quadro P5000 is 263% faster in 1080p
Quadro P5000 is 320% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	32.52	8.99
Recency	1 October 2016	19 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	65 Watt

Quadro P5000 has a 261.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

K2200M, on the other hand, has 53.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5000 is a workstation card while Quadro K2200M 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.