Quadro P2200 vs FirePro W4100

Place in the ranking	701	234
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.45	22.32
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Cape Verde	GP106
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	13 August 2014 (10 years ago)	10 June 2019 (5 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 cores	512	1280
Core clock speed	630 MHz	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1493 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	4,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	20.16	119.4
Floating-point processing power	0.6451 TFLOPS	3.822 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	40
TMUs	32	80

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).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	171 mm	201 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Form factor	low profile / half length	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5X
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	5 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	160 Bit
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	1251 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	200.2 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 Connectors	4x mini-DisplayPort	4x DisplayPort
Dual-link DVI support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
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.

FirePro W4100 3.96

Quadro P2200 24.32
+514%

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.

FirePro W4100 1521

Quadro P2200 9350
+515%

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.

FirePro W4100 5478

Quadro P2200 32449
+492%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

FirePro W4100 6520

Quadro P2200 31127
+377%

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 HD	17 −488%	100−110 +488%
4K	3 −500%	18−20 +500%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Elden Ring	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −488%	100−105 +488%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −477%	75−80 +477%
Valorant	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Dota 2	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Elden Ring	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −471%	120−130 +471%
Fortnite	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −488%	100−105 +488%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −500%	210−220 +500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −477%	75−80 +477%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −507%	85−90 +507%
Valorant	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
World of Tanks	65−70 −497%	400−450 +497%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −463%	45−50 +463%
Dota 2	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −471%	120−130 +471%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −488%	100−105 +488%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −500%	210−220 +500%
Valorant	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Elden Ring	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −507%	170−180 +507%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
World of Tanks	27−30 −507%	170−180 +507%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Valorant	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
Elden Ring	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Dota 2	16−18 −494%	95−100 +494%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Fortnite	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Valorant	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%

This is how FirePro W4100 and Quadro P2200 compete in popular games:

Quadro P2200 is 488% faster in 1080p
Quadro P2200 is 500% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.96	24.32
Recency	13 August 2014	10 June 2019
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	5 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	75 Watt

FirePro W4100 has 50% lower power consumption.

Quadro P2200, on the other hand, has a 514.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 150% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W4100 in performance tests.

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