Quadro K2200 vs Quadro P5200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5200 with Quadro K2200, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5200
2018
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
31.41
+239%

P5200 outperforms K2200 by a whopping 239% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking179476
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.35
Power efficiency21.679.41
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGP104GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date21 February 2018 (6 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$395.75

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 cores2560640
Core clock speed1556 MHz1046 MHz
Boost clock speed1746 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt68 Watt
Texture fill rate279.444.96
Floating-point processing power8.94 TFLOPS1.439 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs16040

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-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data202 mm
Widthno data1-slot
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 amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth230.4 GB/s80.19 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 outputs1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA6.15.0

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 P5200 31.41
+239%
Quadro K2200 9.27

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 P5200 12077
+239%
Quadro K2200 3563

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 P5200 44354
+288%
Quadro K2200 11421

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 P5200 45615
+354%
Quadro K2200 10057

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 P5200 45689
+300%
Quadro K2200 11410

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 HD114
+280%
30−35
−280%
4K46
+283%
12−14
−283%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data13.19
4Kno data32.98

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+244%
18−20
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
Elden Ring 100−110
+253%
30−33
−253%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+279%
24−27
−279%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+244%
18−20
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+260%
40−45
−260%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+276%
21−24
−276%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
Valorant 120−130
+257%
35−40
−257%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+279%
24−27
−279%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+244%
18−20
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
Dota 2 100−110
+247%
30−33
−247%
Elden Ring 100−110
+253%
30−33
−253%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+263%
24−27
−263%
Fortnite 140−150
+268%
40−45
−268%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+260%
40−45
−260%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+243%
30−33
−243%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+276%
21−24
−276%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 216
+260%
60−65
−260%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+253%
30−33
−253%
Valorant 120−130
+257%
35−40
−257%
World of Tanks 270−280
+245%
80−85
−245%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+279%
24−27
−279%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+244%
18−20
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
Dota 2 100−110
+247%
30−33
−247%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+263%
24−27
−263%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+260%
40−45
−260%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 84
+250%
24−27
−250%
Valorant 120−130
+257%
35−40
−257%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 55−60
+250%
16−18
−250%
Elden Ring 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+250%
16−18
−250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+250%
50−55
−250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
World of Tanks 200−210
+267%
55−60
−267%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+239%
18−20
−239%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+263%
27−30
−263%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+263%
24−27
−263%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+289%
18−20
−289%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+257%
14−16
−257%
Valorant 90−95
+279%
24−27
−279%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Dota 2 55−60
+263%
16−18
−263%
Elden Ring 27−30
+286%
7−8
−286%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+263%
16−18
−263%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 93
+244%
27−30
−244%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+263%
16−18
−263%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Dota 2 55−60
+263%
16−18
−263%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Fortnite 40−45
+242%
12−14
−242%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+257%
14−16
−257%
Valorant 45−50
+283%
12−14
−283%

This is how Quadro P5200 and Quadro K2200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5200 is 280% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5200 is 283% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.41 9.27
Recency 21 February 2018 22 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 68 Watt

Quadro P5200 has a 238.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro K2200, on the other hand, has 47.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5200 is a mobile workstation card while Quadro K2200 is a 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 P5200
Quadro P5200
NVIDIA Quadro K2200
Quadro K2200

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.


4.1 94 votes

Rate Quadro P5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 422 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 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.