Quadro K2200M vs GeForce GTX 965M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 965M with Quadro K2200M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 965M
2016
2 GB GDDR5
9.85
+9.8%

GTX 965M outperforms K2200M by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking456486
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.519.46
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGM206SGM107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date2016 (8 years ago)19 July 2014 (10 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 cores1024640
Core clock speed944 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown65 Watt
Texture fill rate73.6026.68
Floating-point processing power2.355 TFLOPS0.8538 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs6440

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
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
SLI options+-

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 amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s80 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-
Display Portno data1.2
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.75.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.3+
CUDA+5.0

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.

GTX 965M 9.85
+9.8%
K2200M 8.97

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.

GTX 965M 3797
+9.9%
K2200M 3456

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.

GTX 965M 14394
+33.4%
K2200M 10787

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 HD45
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
1440p26
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
4K20
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Battlefield 5 49
+22.5%
40−45
−22.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 40
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+18.2%
55−60
−18.2%
Hitman 3 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 69
+15%
60−65
−15%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+14.5%
55−60
−14.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 41
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Battlefield 5 37
+23.3%
30−33
−23.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 29
+20.8%
24−27
−20.8%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+18.2%
55−60
−18.2%
Hitman 3 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+10%
30−33
−10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 86
+14.7%
75−80
−14.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+14.5%
55−60
−14.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 13
+30%
10−11
−30%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Forza Horizon 4 28
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Hitman 3 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 23
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+14.5%
55−60
−14.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 32
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%
Hitman 3 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+12.7%
55−60
−12.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+30%
10−11
−30%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%

This is how GTX 965M and K2200M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 965M is 13% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 965M is 24% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 965M is 11% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.85 8.97

GTX 965M has a 9.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 965M and Quadro K2200M.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 965M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2200M is a mobile 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GeForce GTX 965M
NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
Quadro K2200M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 109 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 965M 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

Questions & comments

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