Quadro P3200 vs GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition with Quadro P3200, including specs and performance data.

GT 755M Mac Edition
2013
1 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
1.98

P3200 outperforms GT 755M Mac Edition by a whopping 927% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking906288
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.0220.67
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK107GP104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date8 November 2013 (11 years ago)21 February 2018 (7 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 cores3841792
Core clock speed1085 MHz1328 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1543 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate34.72172.8
Floating-point processing power0.8333 TFLOPS5.53 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs32112

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (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 amount1 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s168.3 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

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.06.1

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 HD8−9
−950%
84
+950%
4K2−3
−1300%
28
+1300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Far Cry 5 74
+0%
74
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 88
+0%
88
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
+0%
84
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Far Cry 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 72
+0%
72
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how GT 755M Mac Edition and Quadro P3200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P3200 is 950% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P3200 is 1300% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.98 20.34
Recency 8 November 2013 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 75 Watt

GT 755M Mac Edition has 50% lower power consumption.

Quadro P3200, on the other hand, has a 927.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P3200 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition
NVIDIA Quadro P3200
Quadro P3200

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.


4.2 11 votes

Rate GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 327 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 755M Mac Edition or Quadro P3200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.