Quadro K2200M vs Radeon RX 460 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 460 Mobile with Quadro K2200M, including specs and performance data.

RX 460 Mobile
2016, $86
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
9.32
+10.8%

460 Mobile outperforms K2200M by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking499538
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.069.97
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameBaffinGM107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date8 August 2016 (9 years ago)19 July 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 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 cores896640
Core clock speed1000 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed1180 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate66.0826.68
Floating-point processing power2.115 TFLOPS0.8538 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5640
L1 Cache224 KB320 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB2 MB

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)MXM-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-5.0

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 HD35
+16.7%
30−35
−16.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.46no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+13.3%
45−50
−13.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+13.3%
45−50
−13.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Fortnite 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+20.8%
24−27
−20.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
Valorant 90−95
+15%
80−85
−15%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+13.3%
45−50
−13.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+20%
120−130
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Dota 2 65−70
+15%
60−65
−15%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Fortnite 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+20.8%
24−27
−20.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Valorant 90−95
+15%
80−85
−15%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Dota 2 65−70
+15%
60−65
−15%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Valorant 90−95
+15%
80−85
−15%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+20%
60−65
−20%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+22.5%
40−45
−22.5%
Valorant 100−110
+16.7%
90−95
−16.7%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Valorant 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

This is how RX 460 Mobile and K2200M compete in popular games:

  • RX 460 Mobile is 17% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.32 8.41
Recency 8 August 2016 19 July 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 65 Watt

RX 460 Mobile has a 10.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 18.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 460 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 460 Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2200M is a mobile workstation one.

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 RX 460 Mobile
Radeon RX 460 Mobile
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.


2.8 17 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 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

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 460 Mobile or Quadro K2200M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.