NVIDIA Quadro K2200 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and NVIDIA Quadro K4000 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 1 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• Around 29% higher core clock speed: 1046 MHz vs 810 MHz
• Around 16% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 1,244 gflops
• Around 18% lower typical power consumption: 68 Watt vs 80 Watt
• Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
• Around 31% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3572 vs 2721
• Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 548 vs 424
• Around 80% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12020 vs 6674
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 vs 18.462
• Around 37% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 588.094 vs 427.88
• Around 69% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.205 vs 1.899
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.455 vs 23.742
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 166.26 vs 61.965
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4921 vs 3798
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4921 vs 3798
• Around 46% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1193 vs 817

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4000

• Around 15% higher texture fill rate: 51.84 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• Around 20% higher pipelines: 768 vs 640
• Around 12% higher memory clock speed: 5616 MHz vs 5012 MHz
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3651 vs 1577
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3321 vs 1671
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3651 vs 1577
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3321 vs 1671

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3572 2721
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	548 424
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	12020 6674
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	40.695 18.462
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	588.094 427.88
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.205 1.899
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.455 23.742
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	166.26 61.965
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 3798
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 3651
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3321
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 3798
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 3651
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3321
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	1193 817

Compare specifications (specs)