NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB and NVIDIA Quadro K2200 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• Around 44% higher core clock speed: 1506 MHz vs 1046 MHz
• Around 52% higher boost clock speed: 1709 MHz vs 1124 MHz
• 3x more texture fill rate: 136.7 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• 2x more pipelines: 1280 vs 640
• 3x better floating-point performance: 4,375 gflops vs 1,439 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 60% higher memory clock speed: 8008 MHz vs 5012 MHz
• 2.8x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10079 vs 3572
• Around 36% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 747 vs 548
• 2.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 35369 vs 12020
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 119.148 vs 40.695
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1373.562 vs 588.094
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.694 vs 3.205
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 454.799 vs 166.26
• 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12442 vs 4921
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3691 vs 1577
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 vs 1671
• 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12442 vs 4921
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3691 vs 1577
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 vs 1671

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2200

• Around 76% lower typical power consumption: 68 Watt vs 120 Watt
• Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.455 vs 21.766
• Around 32% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1193 vs 907

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	10079 3572
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	747 548
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	35369 12020
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	119.148 40.695
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1373.562 588.094
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.694 3.205
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	21.766 30.455
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	454.799 166.26
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12442 4921
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3691 1577
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3340 1671
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12442 4921
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3691 1577
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3340 1671
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	907 1193

Compare specifications (specs)