NVIDIA Quadro K2200 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 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 Quadro K2200

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• Around 43% higher core clock speed: 1046 MHz vs 732 MHz
• Around 10% higher texture fill rate: 44.96 GTexel / s vs 41.0 GTexel / s
• Around 43% higher pipelines: 640 vs 448
• Around 10% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 1,311.7 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 3.1x lower typical power consumption: 68 Watt vs 210 Watt
• 3.2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1280 MB
• Around 32% higher memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 3800 MHz
• Around 19% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 vs 34.324
• Around 37% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 166.26 vs 121.575
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4921 vs 4590
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4921 vs 4590

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1181.463 vs 588.094
• Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.978 vs 3.205
• Around 92% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 58.37 vs 30.455
• Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2133 vs 1577
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3333 vs 1671
• Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2133 vs 1577
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3333 vs 1671
• 3.5x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4197 vs 1193

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	40.695 34.324
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	588.094 1181.463
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.205 3.978
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.455 58.37
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	166.26 121.575
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 4590
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 2133
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3333
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 4590
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 2133
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3333
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	1193 4197

Compare specifications (specs)