Quadro K2200 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS

Place in the ranking	428	476
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	3.21
Power efficiency	24.71	9.31
Architecture	no data	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	no data	GM107
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	no data	22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$395.75

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	1536	640
Core clock speed	no data	1046 MHz
Boost clock speed	1250 MHz	1124 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	4 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	68 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	44.96
Floating-point processing power	no data	1.439 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	16
TMUs	no data	40

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).

Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	202 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	LPDDR5x	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	no data	4 GB
Memory bus width	no data	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	8448 MHz	1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	80.19 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 data

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	no data	5.1
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	+
CUDA	-	5.0

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	34 +25.9%	27−30 −25.9%
1440p	17 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	14.66
1440p	no data	28.27

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.82	9.24
Chip lithography	4 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	68 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 17.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 126.7% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is a notebook card while Quadro K2200 is a workstation one.

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