Quadro FX 580 vs Quadro M2200

Place in the ranking	424	1248
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	13.97	0.73
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GM206	G96C
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	11 January 2017 (7 years ago)	9 April 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$199

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 cores	1024	32
Core clock speed	695 MHz	450 MHz
Boost clock speed	1036 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,940 million	314 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	66.30	7.200
Floating-point processing power	2.122 TFLOPS	0.072 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	8
TMUs	64	16

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	198 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1377 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	88 GB/s	25.6 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Display Port	1.2	no data

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.

DirectX	12	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	5.2	1.1

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 11.02
+2524%

FX 580 0.42

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 4253
+2542%

FX 580 161

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 HD	44 +4300%	1−2 −4300%
4K	14	0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

199.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

16−18

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18	0−1
Battlefield 5	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Far Cry 5	24−27	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +3550%	2−3 −3550%
Hitman 3	21−24	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +2850%	2−3 −2850%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18	0−1
Battlefield 5	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Far Cry 5	24−27	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +3550%	2−3 −3550%
Hitman 3	21−24	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +2850%	2−3 −2850%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Far Cry 5	24−27	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +3550%	2−3 −3550%
Hitman 3	21−24	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +2850%	2−3 −2850%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
+3000%

1−2

−3000%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	12−14	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +5000%	1−2 −5000%
Hitman 3	14−16	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24	0−1
Metro Exodus	16−18	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +3350%	2−3 −3350%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9	0−1
Hitman 3	7−8	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +4900%	1−2 −4900%
Metro Exodus	9−10	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

0−1

This is how Quadro M2200 and FX 580 compete in popular games:

Quadro M2200 is 4300% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.02	0.42
Recency	11 January 2017	9 April 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	40 Watt

Quadro M2200 has a 2523.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

FX 580, on the other hand, has 37.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 580 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2200 is a mobile workstation card while Quadro FX 580 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.