Quadro P2200 vs Radeon Pro Vega 56

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 56 with Quadro P2200, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 56
2017
8 GB HBM2, 210 Watt
32.13
+32.1%

Pro Vega 56 outperforms P2200 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking175234
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation45.78no data
Power efficiency10.5622.37
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameVega 10GP106
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date14 August 2017 (7 years ago)10 June 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 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 cores35841280
Core clock speed1138 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz1493 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million4,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate280.0119.4
Floating-point processing power8.96 TFLOPS3.822 TFLOPS
ROPs6440
TMUs22480

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data201 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 typeHBM2GDDR5X
Maximum RAM amount8 GB5 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz1251 MHz
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s200.2 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.1251.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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.

Pro Vega 56 32.13
+32.1%
Quadro P2200 24.32

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.

Pro Vega 56 12353
+32.1%
Quadro P2200 9349

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.

Pro Vega 56 61716
+90.2%
Quadro P2200 32444

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.

Pro Vega 56 66124
+112%
Quadro P2200 31127

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 HD100
+33.3%
75−80
−33.3%
4K61
+35.6%
45−50
−35.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.99no data
4K6.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+40%
45−50
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Elden Ring 100−110
+36.3%
80−85
−36.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+41.5%
65−70
−41.5%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+40%
45−50
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+35.5%
110−120
−35.5%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+35%
60−65
−35%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+46.7%
45−50
−46.7%
Valorant 120−130
+34.7%
95−100
−34.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+41.5%
65−70
−41.5%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+40%
45−50
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Dota 2 36
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Elden Ring 100−110
+36.3%
80−85
−36.3%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Fortnite 150−160
+36.4%
110−120
−36.4%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+35.5%
110−120
−35.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+40%
75−80
−40%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+35%
60−65
−35%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
+40.8%
130−140
−40.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+46.7%
45−50
−46.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+36.3%
80−85
−36.3%
Valorant 120−130
+34.7%
95−100
−34.7%
World of Tanks 270−280
+38%
200−210
−38%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+41.5%
65−70
−41.5%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+40%
45−50
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Dota 2 102
+36%
75−80
−36%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+35.5%
110−120
−35.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
+40.8%
130−140
−40.8%
Valorant 120−130
+34.7%
95−100
−34.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 55−60
+42.5%
40−45
−42.5%
Elden Ring 60−65
+35.6%
45−50
−35.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+42.5%
40−45
−42.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+34.6%
130−140
−34.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
World of Tanks 200−210
+38%
150−160
−38%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+34.7%
75−80
−34.7%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+36.9%
65−70
−36.9%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+44%
50−55
−44%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+48.6%
35−40
−48.6%
Valorant 90−95
+32.9%
70−75
−32.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Dota 2 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Elden Ring 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+34.7%
75−80
−34.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Dota 2 96
+37.1%
70−75
−37.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
Fortnite 40−45
+43.3%
30−33
−43.3%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+45.7%
35−40
−45.7%
Valorant 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%

This is how Pro Vega 56 and Quadro P2200 compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 56 is 33% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 56 is 36% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.13 24.32
Recency 14 August 2017 10 June 2019
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 5 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 75 Watt

Pro Vega 56 has a 32.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro P2200, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 180% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 56 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 56 is a mobile workstation card while Quadro P2200 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.


AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56
Radeon Pro Vega 56
NVIDIA Quadro P2200
Quadro P2200

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.


3.5 90 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 56 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 371 vote

Rate Quadro P2200 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.