AMD Radeon Pro W5500 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro W5500 and NVIDIA Quadro K2200M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro W5500
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 78% higher core clock speed: 1187 MHz vs 667 MHz
- 4617.7x more texture fill rate: 123.2 GTexel/s vs 26.68 GTexel / s
- 2.2x more pipelines: 1408 vs 640
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 28 nm
- 4x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 2 GB
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12184 vs 4750
- Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3084
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12184 vs 4750
- Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3084
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 10 Feb 2020 vs 19 July 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1187 MHz vs 667 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 123.2 GTexel/s vs 26.68 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1408 vs 640 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 28 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 vs 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3084 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 vs 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3084 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
- Around 92% lower typical power consumption: 65 Watt vs 125 Watt
- 2.9x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective)
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 vs 3463
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 vs 3463
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt vs 125 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 vs 3463 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 vs 3463 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro W5500
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro W5500 | NVIDIA Quadro K2200M |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 130.7 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2361.73 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.641 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 135.462 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 774.974 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 | 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3463 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3084 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 | 4750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3463 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3084 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3469 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 384 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10787 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro W5500 | NVIDIA Quadro K2200M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | Navi 14 | GM107 |
| Launch date | 10 Feb 2020 | 19 July 2014 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | |
| Place in performance rating | 330 | 540 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1400 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1187 MHz | 667 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 246.4 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.942 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1408 | 640 |
| Pixel fill rate | 44.80 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 26.68 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Transistor count | 6400 million | 1,870 million |
| Floating-point performance | 853.8 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Width | Single-slot | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | 80 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) | 5012 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon Pro W5500 with others
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
ATIRadeon X1950 CrossFire Edition
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
AMDRadeon RX 580
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GH
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
NVIDIAT550 Mobile
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
NVIDIACMP 30HX
