Quadro K2200 vs GRID T4-2Q
Quadro K2200
Popular choices:
GRID T4-2Q
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 Quadro K2200 is positioned at rank 169 and the GRID T4-2Q is on rank 231, 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 Quadro K2200
Performance Per Dollar GRID T4-2Q
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 | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| 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 | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1364%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) |
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 Quadro K2200 and GRID T4-2Q
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K2200 scores 3,580 and the GRID T4-2Q reaches 3,668 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2200 is built on Maxwell while the GRID T4-2Q uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Quadro K2200) vs 2,048 (GRID T4-2Q). Raw compute: 1.439 TFLOPS (Quadro K2200) vs 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID T4-2Q). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 1178 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,580 | 3,668+2% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 2048+220% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.439 TFLOPS | 4.825 TFLOPS+235% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 1178 MHz+5% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 40 | 128+220% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 768 KB+140% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro K2200 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GRID T4-2Q has 2 GB. The Quadro K2200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2200) vs 12 Ultimate (GRID T4-2Q). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4th Gen (Quadro K2200) vs NVENC 6th Gen (GRID T4-2Q). Decoder: NVDEC 1 vs NVDEC 4th Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2200) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (GRID T4-2Q).
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4th Gen | NVENC 6th Gen |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1 | NVDEC 4th Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K2200 draws 68W versus the GRID T4-2Q's 225W — a 107.2% difference. The Quadro K2200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2200) vs 350W (GRID T4-2Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 203mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 68W-70% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 203mm | 168mm |
| Height | 111mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 70-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 52.6+223% | 16.3 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2200 launched at $500 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the GRID T4-2Q launched at $845 and now averages $600. The Quadro K2200 costs 93.3% less ($560 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 89.5 (Quadro K2200) vs 6.1 (GRID T4-2Q) — the Quadro K2200 offers 1367.2% better value. The GRID T4-2Q is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | GRID T4-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500-41% | $845 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-93% | $600 |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.5+1367% | 6.1 |
| Codename | GM107 | GM204 |
| Release | July 22 2014 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #534 | #433 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K2200 and GRID T4-2Q
