Quadro FX 3800 vs Quadro K2200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2200 and Quadro FX 3800, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K2200
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 68 Watt
9.24
+332%

K2200 outperforms FX 3800 by a whopping 332% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking476866
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.210.08
Power efficiency9.321.36
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGM107GT200B
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)30 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$395.75 $799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K2200 has 3913% better value for money than FX 3800.

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 cores640192
Core clock speed1046 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt108 Watt
Texture fill rate44.9638.40
Floating-point processing power1.439 TFLOPS0.4623 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4064

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 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length202 mm198 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.19 GB/s51.2 GB/s

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 DVI, 2x DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.01.3

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.

Quadro K2200 9.24
+332%
FX 3800 2.14

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.

Quadro K2200 3559
+332%
FX 3800 824

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.24 2.14
Recency 22 July 2014 30 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 108 Watt

Quadro K2200 has a 331.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 58.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3800 in performance tests.


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 Quadro K2200
Quadro K2200
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
Quadro FX 3800

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.


3.7 420 votes

Rate Quadro K2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 50 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3800 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.