NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro 560X

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

Pro 560X
9.49

Quadro M2200 outperforms Radeon Pro 560X by 16% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking429388
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money14.641.06
ArchitecturePolaris (2016−2019)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code namePolaris 21N17P-Q3
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date5 June 2017 (6 years old)13 January 2017 (7 years old)
Current price$133 $1967
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro 560X has 1281% better value for money than Quadro M2200.

Technical specs

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 cores10241024
Core clock speed907 MHz694 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1038 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million1870 Million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate64.2666.30

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro 560X and Quadro M2200 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

Memory

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 speed5080 MHz5508 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/s88 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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

Technologies

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

FreeSync+no data
Optimusno data+
3D Stereono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDAno data5.2

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.

Pro 560X 9.49
Quadro M2200 11.05
+16.4%

Quadro M2200 outperforms Radeon Pro 560X by 16% in our combined 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%

Pro 560X 3677
Quadro M2200 4285
+16.5%

Quadro M2200 outperforms Radeon Pro 560X by 17% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Pro 560X 7590
+3%
Quadro M2200 7372

Radeon Pro 560X outperforms Quadro M2200 by 3% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Pro 560X 5699
Quadro M2200 5850
+2.6%

Quadro M2200 outperforms Radeon Pro 560X by 3% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Pro 560X 32449
Quadro M2200 37796
+16.5%

Quadro M2200 outperforms Radeon Pro 560X by 16% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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%

Pro 560X 17520
+34.9%
Quadro M2200 12989

Radeon Pro 560X outperforms Quadro M2200 by 35% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

Pro 560X 255217
Quadro M2200 289176
+13.3%

Quadro M2200 outperforms Radeon Pro 560X by 13% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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%

Pro 560X 17503
+9%
Quadro M2200 16055

Radeon Pro 560X outperforms Quadro M2200 by 9% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

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 HD41
−9.8%
45
+9.8%
1440p40
−12.5%
45−50
+12.5%
4K17
+21.4%
14
−21.4%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Battlefield 5 43
+13.2%
35−40
−13.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 39
+34.5%
27−30
−34.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Far Cry 5 37
+32.1%
27−30
−32.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 36
+20%
30−33
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 53
+35.9%
35−40
−35.9%
Hitman 3 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30
+57.9%
18−20
−57.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 31
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Battlefield 5 36
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 26
−11.5%
27−30
+11.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Far Cry 5 33
+17.9%
27−30
−17.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+3.3%
30−33
−3.3%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+28.2%
35−40
−28.2%
Hitman 3 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
Metro Exodus 19
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10
−90%
18−20
+90%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 25
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
−8.8%
37
+8.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
−64.3%
21−24
+64.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Battlefield 5 33
−15.2%
35−40
+15.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Far Cry 5 31
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 27
−11.1%
30−33
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 36
−8.3%
35−40
+8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Hitman 3 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Metro Exodus 11
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−26.7%
18−20
+26.7%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Hitman 3 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Metro Exodus 7
+75%
4−5
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−85.7%
13
+85.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 9
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

This is how Pro 560X and Quadro M2200 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • Quadro M2200 is 9.8% faster than Pro 560X

1440p resolution:

  • Quadro M2200 is 12.5% faster than Pro 560X

4K resolution:

  • Pro 560X is 21.4% faster than Quadro M2200

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro 560X is 75% faster than the Quadro M2200.
  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M2200 is 90% faster than the Pro 560X.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 560X is ahead in 18 tests (26%)
  • Quadro M2200 is ahead in 46 tests (68%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (6%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 9.49 11.05
Recency 5 June 2017 13 January 2017
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 55 Watt

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 560X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro 560X
Radeon Pro 560X
NVIDIA Quadro M2200
Quadro M2200

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 169 votes

Rate AMD Radeon Pro 560X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 264 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.