RTX A4500 vs Quadro M2200

Place in the ranking	424	45
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	13.97	19.56
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM206	GA102
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	11 January 2017 (7 years ago)	23 November 2021 (3 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 cores	1024	7168
Core clock speed	695 MHz	1050 MHz
Boost clock speed	1036 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	2,940 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	200 Watt
Texture fill rate	66.30	369.6
Floating-point processing power	2.122 TFLOPS	23.65 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	96
TMUs	64	224
Tensor Cores	no data	224
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	56

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 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	20 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	320 Bit
Memory clock speed	1377 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	88 GB/s	640.0 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	4x DisplayPort 1.4a
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	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	5.2	8.6

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

RTX A4500 56.09
+409%

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

RTX A4500 21639
+409%

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 13167

RTX A4500 142509
+982%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Quadro M2200 15592

RTX A4500 132164
+748%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro M2200 12812

RTX A4500 171509
+1239%

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 −400%	220−230 +400%
4K	14 −400%	70−75 +400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

16−18

−400%

85−90
+400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −400%	130−140 +400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Battlefield 5	35−40 −386%	170−180 +386%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −400%	110−120 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −400%	130−140 +400%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 −384%	150−160 +384%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 −379%	350−400 +379%
Hitman 3	21−24 −376%	100−105 +376%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 −408%	300−310 +408%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −384%	150−160 +384%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 −355%	300−310 +355%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −400%	130−140 +400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Battlefield 5	35−40 −386%	170−180 +386%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −400%	110−120 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −400%	130−140 +400%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 −384%	150−160 +384%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 −379%	350−400 +379%
Hitman 3	21−24 −376%	100−105 +376%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 −408%	300−310 +408%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −384%	150−160 +384%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 −355%	300−310 +355%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 −400%	130−140 +400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −400%	110−120 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −400%	130−140 +400%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 −379%	350−400 +379%
Hitman 3	21−24 −376%	100−105 +376%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 −408%	300−310 +408%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 −400%	100−105 +400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 −355%	300−310 +355%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
−384%

150−160

+384%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −376%	100−105 +376%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%

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 −400%	65−70 +400%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −390%	250−260 +390%
Hitman 3	14−16 −400%	70−75 +400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −378%	110−120 +378%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −400%	85−90 +400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −400%	80−85 +400%
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

−400%

90−95
+400%

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 −400%	250−260 +400%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −400%	45−50 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 −400%	65−70 +400%

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 −400%	70−75 +400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −400%	40−45 +400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−400%

50−55
+400%

This is how Quadro M2200 and RTX A4500 compete in popular games:

RTX A4500 is 400% faster in 1080p
RTX A4500 is 400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.02	56.09
Recency	11 January 2017	23 November 2021
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	20 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	200 Watt

Quadro M2200 has 263.6% lower power consumption.

RTX A4500, on the other hand, has a 409% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 400% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A4500 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 A4500 is a workstation one.

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