NVIDIA Quadro K2200 vs NVIDIA Quadro K4200

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and NVIDIA Quadro K4200 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

• Around 36% higher core clock speed: 1046 MHz vs 771 MHz
• Around 43% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 784 MHz
• Around 59% lower typical power consumption: 68 Watt vs 108 Watt
• Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 548 vs 498
• Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 vs 33.016
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.205 vs 2.73
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 166.26 vs 70.194

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K4200

• Around 95% higher texture fill rate: 87.81 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• 2.1x more pipelines: 1344 vs 640
• Around 46% better floating-point performance: 2,107 gflops vs 1,439 gflops
• Around 8% higher memory clock speed: 5400 MHz vs 5012 MHz
• Around 22% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4340 vs 3572
• Around 3% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12321 vs 12020
• Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 736.063 vs 588.094
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 31.588 vs 30.455
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6373 vs 4921
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3382 vs 1577
• Around 98% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3311 vs 1671
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6373 vs 4921
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3382 vs 1577
• Around 98% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3311 vs 1671

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3572 4340
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	548 498
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	12020 12321
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	40.695 33.016
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	588.094 736.063
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.205 2.73
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.455 31.588
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	166.26 70.194
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 6373
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 3382
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3311
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4921 6373
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 3382
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1671 3311

Compare specifications (specs)