Quadro K2200 vs P104-100
Quadro K2200
Popular choices:
P104-100
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. The Quadro K2200 is positioned at rank #169 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K2200
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The P104-100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.7% 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 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The P104-100 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the P104-100 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $40), it costs 75% less, resulting in a 310.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K2200 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+310.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 P104-100
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.
P104-100
The P104-100 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 12 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,678 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K2200 scores 3,580 and the P104-100 reaches 3,678 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K2200 is built on Maxwell while the P104-100 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 640 (Quadro K2200) vs 1,920 (P104-100). Raw compute: 1.439 TFLOPS (Quadro K2200) vs 6.655 TFLOPS (P104-100). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 1733 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,580 | 3,678+3% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 1920+200% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.439 TFLOPS | 6.655 TFLOPS+362% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 1733 MHz+54% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 40 | 120+200% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 720 KB+125% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 P104-100 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 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K2200 draws 68W versus the P104-100's 30W — a 77.6% difference. The P104-100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2200) vs 350W (P104-100). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 68W | 30W-56% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 203mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 52.6 | 122.6+133% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2200 launched at $500 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the P104-100 launched at $0 and now averages $10. The P104-100 costs 75% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 89.5 (Quadro K2200) vs 367.8 (P104-100) — the P104-100 offers 310.9% better value. The P104-100 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | P104-100 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $10-75% |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.5 | 367.8+311% |
| Codename | GM107 | GP104 |
| Release | July 22 2014 | December 12 2017 |
| Ranking | #534 | #529 |
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 P104-100
