GRID T4-2Q vs Quadro K2200
GRID T4-2Q
Popular choices:
Quadro K2200
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GRID T4-2Q is positioned at rank 231 and the Quadro K2200 is on rank 169, so the Quadro K2200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID T4-2Q
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID T4-2Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K2200 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K2200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K2200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $600), it costs 93% less, resulting in a 1364% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1364%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID T4-2Q and Quadro K2200
GRID T4-2Q
The GRID T4-2Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,668 points.
Quadro K2200
The Quadro K2200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1046 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 68W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,580 points. Launch price was $395.75.
Graphics Performance
The GRID T4-2Q scores 3,668 and the Quadro K2200 reaches 3,580 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID T4-2Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro K2200 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID T4-2Q) vs 640 (Quadro K2200). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID T4-2Q) vs 1.439 TFLOPS (Quadro K2200). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1124 MHz.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,668+2% | 3,580 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+220% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+235% | 1.439 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz+5% | 1124 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128+220% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+140% | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GRID T4-2Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K2200 has 4 GB. The Quadro K2200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GRID T4-2Q) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2200). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 (11_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (GRID T4-2Q) vs NVENC 4th Gen (Quadro K2200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th Gen vs NVDEC 1. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GRID T4-2Q) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2200).
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | NVENC 4th Gen |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th Gen | NVDEC 1 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID T4-2Q draws 225W versus the Quadro K2200's 68W — a 107.2% difference. The Quadro K2200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID T4-2Q) vs 350W (Quadro K2200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 203mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 75°C.
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 68W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 203mm |
| Height | 69mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70-7% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 16.3 | 52.6+223% |
Value Analysis
The GRID T4-2Q launched at $845 MSRP and currently averages $600, while the Quadro K2200 launched at $500 and now averages $40. The Quadro K2200 costs 93.3% less ($560 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.1 (GRID T4-2Q) vs 89.5 (Quadro K2200) — the Quadro K2200 offers 1367.2% better value. The GRID T4-2Q is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | GRID T4-2Q | Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $845 | $500-41% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $600 | $40-93% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.1 | 89.5+1367% |
| Codename | GM204 | GM107 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #433 | #534 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID T4-2Q and Quadro K2200
