NVIDIA Quadro K2200 vs ATI Radeon HD 5870

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and ATI Radeon HD 5870 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: 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 Quadro K2200

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 23% higher core clock speed: 1046 MHz vs 850 MHz
• Around 32% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 850 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2.8x lower typical power consumption: 68 Watt vs 188 Watt
• 4x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 4% higher memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 4800 MHz
• Around 62% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3572 vs 2199
• Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 548 vs 416
• 6.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12020 vs 1858
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 vs 18.789
• Around 81% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.205 vs 1.775
• Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4921 vs 4541
• Around 8% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4921 vs 4541

Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon HD 5870

• Around 51% higher texture fill rate: 68.0 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• 2.5x more pipelines: 1600 vs 640
• Around 89% better floating-point performance: 2,720.0 gflops vs 1,439 gflops
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1339.688 vs 588.094
• Around 43% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 43.496 vs 30.455
• Around 48% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 245.813 vs 166.26
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3671 vs 1577
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 1671
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3671 vs 1577
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 1671

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5870

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3572 2199
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	548 416
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	12020 1858
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	40.695 18.789
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	588.094 1339.688
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.205 1.775
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.455 43.496
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	166.26 245.813
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 4541
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 3671
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3349
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 4541
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 3671
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3349

Compare specifications (specs)