Quadro T500 Mobile vs Quadro K2200M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro K2200M Quadro M600M Quadro M620 Quadro M1000M Quadro M1200 Quadro M2000M
VS
Quadro T400 Mobile Quadro T500 Mobile Quadro T600 Mobile Quadro T1000 Mobile Quadro T1000 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Mobile Quadro T2000 Mobile Quadro T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2200M and Quadro T500 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

K2200M
2014
2 GB GDDR5, 65 Watt
9.09
+1%

K2200M outperforms T500 Mobile by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

K2200M K2200M
T500 Mobile Quadro T500

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking487492
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.5934.29
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM107TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date19 July 2014 (10 years ago)2 December 2020 (4 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 cores640896
Core clock speed667 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1695 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate26.6894.92
Floating-point processing power0.8538 TFLOPS3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4056

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 datamedium sized
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1250 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA5.07.5

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 HD35−40
−2.9%
36
+2.9%
1440p14−16
−7.1%
15
+7.1%
4K16−18
−6.3%
17
+6.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Dota 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 31
+0%
31
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14
+0%
14
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how K2200M and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T500 Mobile is 3% faster in 1080p
  • T500 Mobile is 7% faster in 1440p
  • T500 Mobile is 6% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 45 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 9.09 9.00
Recency 19 July 2014 2 December 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 18 Watt

K2200M has a 1% higher aggregate performance score.

T500 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 261.1% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro K2200M and Quadro T500 Mobile.

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 K2200M
Quadro K2200M
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

K2200M Quadro K2200M
vs
Pro 560 Radeon Pro 560
T500 Mobile Quadro T500 Mobile
vs
Pro W5500M Radeon Pro W5500M
K2200M Quadro K2200M
vs
Pro 460 Radeon Pro 460
E9260 MXM E9260 MXM
vs
K2200M K2200M
Tesla M6 Tesla M6
vs
K2200M K2200M
GRID K520 GRID K520
vs
K2200M K2200M
HD 8950M HD 8950M
vs
K2200M K2200M
RTX 3070 Mobile RTX 3070 Mobile
vs
K2200M K2200M
RTX 4060 Mobile RTX 4060 Mobile
vs
K2200M K2200M
RX 7900 XTX RX 7900 XTX
vs
NVS 510M NVS 510M
ATI X1300 X1300
vs
FX Go1400 FX Go1400
Nvidia RTX 1000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 1000 Ada Generation Mobile
vs
FX Go540 FX Go540
Nvidia RTX 1000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 1000 Ada Generation Mobile
vs
Quadro4 700 Go GL Quadro4 700 Go GL

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.8 39 votes

Rate Quadro K2200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 109 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2200M or Quadro T500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.