Quadro K2200M vs Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile and Quadro K2200M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX 5000 Mobile
2019
16 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
36.04
+296%

RTX 5000 Mobile outperforms K2200M by a whopping 296% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking139487
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency22.479.59
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameTU104GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)19 July 2014 (10 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 cores3072640
Core clock speed1035 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,600 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate296.626.68
Floating-point processing power9.492 TFLOPS0.8538 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs19240
Tensor Cores384no data
Ray Tracing Cores48no data

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 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 Portno data1.2
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
VR Ready+no data
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA7.55.0
DLSS+-

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 HD132
+340%
30−35
−340%
1440p84
+300%
21−24
−300%
4K54
+350%
12−14
−350%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+313%
24−27
−313%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+311%
18−20
−311%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+322%
18−20
−322%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+313%
24−27
−313%
Battlefield 5 165
+313%
40−45
−313%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+311%
18−20
−311%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+322%
18−20
−322%
Far Cry 5 128
+327%
30−33
−327%
Fortnite 150−160
+329%
35−40
−329%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+333%
30−33
−333%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+308%
24−27
−308%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+347%
30−33
−347%
Valorant 200−210
+310%
50−55
−310%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+313%
24−27
−313%
Battlefield 5 162
+305%
40−45
−305%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+311%
18−20
−311%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+326%
65−70
−326%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+322%
18−20
−322%
Dota 2 98
+308%
24−27
−308%
Far Cry 5 123
+310%
30−33
−310%
Fortnite 150−160
+329%
35−40
−329%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+333%
30−33
−333%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+308%
24−27
−308%
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
+326%
27−30
−326%
Metro Exodus 99
+313%
24−27
−313%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+347%
30−33
−347%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 181
+302%
45−50
−302%
Valorant 200−210
+310%
50−55
−310%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 152
+334%
35−40
−334%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+311%
18−20
−311%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+322%
18−20
−322%
Dota 2 92
+338%
21−24
−338%
Far Cry 5 115
+326%
27−30
−326%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+333%
30−33
−333%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+308%
24−27
−308%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+347%
30−33
−347%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100
+317%
24−27
−317%
Valorant 181
+302%
45−50
−302%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+329%
35−40
−329%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+320%
55−60
−320%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Metro Exodus 59
+321%
14−16
−321%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+338%
40−45
−338%
Valorant 240−250
+300%
60−65
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 124
+313%
30−33
−313%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+311%
9−10
−311%
Far Cry 5 102
+325%
24−27
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+338%
21−24
−338%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+329%
14−16
−329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+336%
14−16
−336%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 85−90
+310%
21−24
−310%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+331%
16−18
−331%
Metro Exodus 37
+311%
9−10
−311%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 71
+344%
16−18
−344%
Valorant 200−210
+306%
50−55
−306%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 73
+306%
18−20
−306%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Dota 2 100−105
+317%
24−27
−317%
Far Cry 5 56
+300%
14−16
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+336%
14−16
−336%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%

This is how RTX 5000 Mobile and K2200M compete in popular games:

  • RTX 5000 Mobile is 340% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 5000 Mobile is 300% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 5000 Mobile is 350% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 36.04 9.09
Recency 27 May 2019 19 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 65 Watt

RTX 5000 Mobile has a 296.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

K2200M, on the other hand, has 69.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200M 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 RTX 5000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 5000
NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
Quadro K2200M

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.


4.3 37 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 39 votes

Rate Quadro K2200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile or Quadro K2200M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.