FirePro W5000 vs Quadro M2200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2200 with FirePro W5000, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
11.05
+42.2%

M2200 outperforms W5000 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking425525
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.54
Power efficiency13.837.13
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM206Pitcairn
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)7 August 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1024768
Core clock speed695 MHz825 MHz
Boost clock speed1036 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate66.3039.60
Floating-point processing power2.122 TFLOPS1.267 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6448

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data183 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Form factorno datafull height / half length
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1377 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/s102.4 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 outputs1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Display Port1.2no data
DisplayPort countno data2
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.2-

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 M2200 11.05
+42.2%
FirePro W5000 7.77

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 M2200 4250
+42.2%
FirePro W5000 2988

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.

Quadro M2200 13264
+33.1%
FirePro W5000 9969

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro M2200 14846
+19.4%
FirePro W5000 12432

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 HD43
+43.3%
30−35
−43.3%
4K14
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data19.97
4Kno data66.56

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Elden Ring 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+50%
24−27
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
Valorant 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+50%
24−27
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Dota 2 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Elden Ring 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Fortnite 60−65
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+52.7%
55−60
−52.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Valorant 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%
World of Tanks 150−160
+56%
100−105
−56%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+50%
24−27
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Dota 2 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+52.7%
55−60
−52.7%
Valorant 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Elden Ring 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+48.6%
35−40
−48.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
World of Tanks 75−80
+43.6%
55−60
−43.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Valorant 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Dota 2 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Elden Ring 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Fortnite 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Valorant 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

This is how Quadro M2200 and FirePro W5000 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is 43% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M2200 is 56% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.05 7.77
Recency 11 January 2017 7 August 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro M2200 has a 42.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 36.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2200 is a mobile workstation card while FirePro W5000 is a 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 Quadro M2200
Quadro M2200
AMD FirePro W5000
FirePro W5000

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.


3.7 378 votes

Rate Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 126 votes

Rate FirePro W5000 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.