Radeon Pro 555X vs Quadro M2200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2200 and Radeon Pro 555X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M2200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
11.05
+31.9%

M2200 outperforms Pro 555X by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking420498
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.917.74
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGM206Polaris 21
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (7 years ago)16 July 2018 (6 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 cores1024768
Core clock speed695 MHz907 MHz
Boost clock speed1036 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate66.3043.54
Floating-point processing power2.122 TFLOPS1.393 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x8
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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1377 MHz1275 MHz
Memory bandwidth88 GB/s81.6 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 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.

FreeSync-+
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 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
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
+31.9%
Pro 555X 8.38

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 4262
+31.7%
Pro 555X 3235

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
+3.7%
Pro 555X 12701

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 15592
+19.6%
Pro 555X 13037

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
+40%
10−12
−40%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+36.8%
18−20
−36.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+30.4%
55−60
−30.4%
Hitman 3 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+22.9%
45−50
−22.9%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+44%
24−27
−44%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+13.8%
55−60
−13.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+36.8%
18−20
−36.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+30.4%
55−60
−30.4%
Hitman 3 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+22.9%
45−50
−22.9%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+44%
24−27
−44%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+20.8%
24−27
−20.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+13.8%
55−60
−13.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+36.8%
18−20
−36.8%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+30.4%
55−60
−30.4%
Hitman 3 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+22.9%
45−50
−22.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−20%
24−27
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+13.8%
55−60
−13.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+50%
30−35
−50%
Hitman 3 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+54.5%
10−12
−54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30.2%
50−55
−30.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+56.3%
30−35
−56.3%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+160%
5−6
−160%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%

This is how Quadro M2200 and Pro 555X compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is 43% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M2200 is 40% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M2200 is 160% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 555X is 20% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M2200 is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • Pro 555X is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.05 8.38
Recency 11 January 2017 16 July 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro M2200 has a 31.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 36.4% lower power consumption.

Pro 555X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro M2200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 555X in performance tests.


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 Radeon Pro 555X
Radeon Pro 555X

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.


3.7 371 vote

Rate Quadro M2200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 165 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 555X 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.