RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Quadro M2200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2200 with RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
11.00

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms Quadro M2200 by a whopping 439% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking42037
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameN17P-Q3no data
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date13 January 2017 (7 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores10247424
Core clock speed694 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1038 MHzno data
Number of transistors1870 Millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt150 Watt (60 - 150 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate66.30no data
Floating-point performance2.122 gflopsno data

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)no data
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 amount4 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed5508 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/sno data
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 data
Display Port1.2no 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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX1212 Ultimate
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA5.2-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 11.00
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 59.26
+439%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 4243
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 22856
+439%

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 HD46
−422%
240−250
+422%
4K14
−436%
75−80
+436%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−438%
140−150
+438%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−414%
180−190
+414%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−400%
110−120
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−438%
140−150
+438%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−416%
160−170
+416%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−379%
350−400
+379%
Hitman 3 21−24
−424%
110−120
+424%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−408%
300−310
+408%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−428%
190−200
+428%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−416%
160−170
+416%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−428%
190−200
+428%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−430%
350−400
+430%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−438%
140−150
+438%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−414%
180−190
+414%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−400%
110−120
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−438%
140−150
+438%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−416%
160−170
+416%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−379%
350−400
+379%
Hitman 3 21−24
−424%
110−120
+424%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−408%
300−310
+408%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−428%
190−200
+428%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−416%
160−170
+416%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−428%
190−200
+428%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−417%
150−160
+417%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−430%
350−400
+430%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−438%
140−150
+438%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−400%
110−120
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−438%
140−150
+438%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−379%
350−400
+379%
Hitman 3 21−24
−424%
110−120
+424%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−408%
300−310
+408%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−428%
190−200
+428%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−400%
100−105
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−430%
350−400
+430%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−416%
160−170
+416%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−424%
110−120
+424%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−438%
70−75
+438%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−429%
270−280
+429%
Hitman 3 14−16
−436%
75−80
+436%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−422%
120−130
+422%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−429%
90−95
+429%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−431%
85−90
+431%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−407%
350−400
+407%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
−428%
95−100
+428%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−400%
50−55
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−400%
40−45
+400%
Hitman 3 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−420%
260−270
+420%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−400%
45−50
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−438%
70−75
+438%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−400%
30−33
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−400%
30−33
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−436%
75−80
+436%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−400%
40−45
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−425%
21−24
+425%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−400%
50−55
+400%

This is how Quadro M2200 and RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is 422% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is 436% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.00 59.26
Recency 13 January 2017 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 150 Watt

Quadro M2200 has 172.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 438.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2200 is a mobile workstation card while RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 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 Quadro M2200
Quadro M2200
NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.8 347 votes

Rate Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 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.