Quadro K2200 vs Radeon Pro 560X
Quadro K2200
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro 560X
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
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon Pro 560X uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon Pro 560X likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro K2200 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro 560X 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 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon Pro 560X remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 Radeon Pro 560X
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.
Radeon Pro 560X
The Radeon Pro 560X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 16 2018. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1004 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,678 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K2200 scores 3,580 and the Radeon Pro 560X 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 Radeon Pro 560X uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 640 (Quadro K2200) vs 1,024 (Radeon Pro 560X). Raw compute: 1.439 TFLOPS (Quadro K2200) vs 2.056 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 560X).
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,580 | 3,678+3% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 1024+60% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.439 TFLOPS | 2.056 TFLOPS+43% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 64+60% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+25% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro K2200 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 560X 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. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro K2200) vs 1 MB (Radeon Pro 560X) — the Quadro K2200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2200) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro 560X). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4th Gen (Quadro K2200) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon Pro 560X). Decoder: NVDEC 1 vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro K2200) vs H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro 560X).
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4th Gen | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1 | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K2200 draws 68W versus the Radeon Pro 560X's 75W — a 9.8% difference. The Quadro K2200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2200) vs 350W (Radeon Pro 560X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 203mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 68W-9% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 203mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 52.6+7% | 49.0 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K2200 launched at $500 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Radeon Pro 560X launched at $0 and now averages $0. The Radeon Pro 560X costs 100+% less ($40 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 89.5 (Quadro K2200) vs Infinity (Radeon Pro 560X) — the Radeon Pro 560X offers Infinity% better value. The Radeon Pro 560X is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro K2200 | Radeon Pro 560X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.5 | Infinity |
| Codename | GM107 | Polaris 21 |
| Release | July 22 2014 | July 16 2018 |
| Ranking | #534 | #528 |
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 Radeon Pro 560X
