NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile vs AMD FirePro M5100
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile and AMD FirePro M5100 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 - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 41% higher core clock speed: 1025 MHz vs 725 MHz
- 2.1x more texture fill rate: 65.6 GTexel / s vs 31 GTexel / s
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 1024 vs 640
- 2.1x better floating-point performance: 2,099 gflops vs 992.0 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 22% higher memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 4500 MHz
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4284 vs 2103
- 2.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 16429 vs 6837
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6337 vs 2926
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6337 vs 2926
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 11 January 2017 vs 16 October 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1025 MHz vs 725 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 65.6 GTexel / s vs 31 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 vs 640 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,099 gflops vs 992.0 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 4500 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4284 vs 2103 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16429 vs 6837 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6337 vs 2926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6337 vs 2926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3713 |
Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro M5100
- 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 800 vs 380
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 800 vs 380 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD FirePro M5100
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile | AMD FirePro M5100 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 380 | 800 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4284 | 2103 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16429 | 6837 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6337 | 2926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6337 | 2926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3358 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.202 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 537.558 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.245 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 40.642 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 108.052 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile | AMD FirePro M5100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GM206 | Venus |
| Launch date | 11 January 2017 | 16 October 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 473 | 643 |
| Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 1025 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,099 gflops | 992.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 640 |
| Texture fill rate | 65.6 GTexel / s | 31 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 2,940 million | 1,500 million |
| Boost clock speed | 775 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 88 GB / s | 72 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | 4500 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile with others
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 560
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile vs
NVIDIATesla M60
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon E6465
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon Pro 575
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile vs
IntelUHD Graphics P750
