Quadro M2200 vs Radeon R9 270 / R7 370

CPU

GPU

Quadro M2200

2017Core: 695 MHzBoost: 1036 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Radeon R9 270 / R7 370

2015Core: 925 MHzBoost: 975 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Quadro M2200 vs Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 Performance Spectrum

Quadro M2200

4 GB 55

4,294

+0.8%

GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with Max-Q Design

GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU

GeForce RTX 5050

GeForce RTX 2080 Ti

Radeon R9 270 / R7 370

2 GB 110

4,260

0.0%

Radeon RX 550X

Radeon HD 6970

Mobility Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire

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.

Quadro M2200 vs Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro M2200 vs Radeon R9 270 / R7 370: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro M2200

2017

Why buy it

✅0.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 110W, a 55W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2017 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
235.6% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.6 vs 28.6 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Radeon R9 270 / R7 370

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 232.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 28.6 vs 8.6 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M2200 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2015 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌100% higher power demand at 110W vs 55W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro M2200 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 0.2% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 0.8% in PassMark G3D (4,294 vs 4,260), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro M2200 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM and a newer 2017 generation instead of 2015. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $351 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $500, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 232.9% (28.6 vs 8.6), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro M2200 has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro M2200 vs Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Quadro M2200

The Quadro M2200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 695 MHz to 1036 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,294 points.

Radeon R9 270 / R7 370

The Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 925 MHz to 975 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,260 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro M2200 scores 4,294 and the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 reaches 4,260 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M2200 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,024 (Quadro M2200) vs 1,280 (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370). Raw compute: 2.122 TFLOPS (Quadro M2200) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370). Boost clocks: 1036 MHz vs 975 MHz.

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
G3D Mark Score	4,294	4,260
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	GCN 1.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1280+25%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.122 TFLOPS	2.496 TFLOPS+18%
Boost Clock	1036 MHz+6%	975 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	80+25%
L1 Cache	384 KB	384 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro M2200 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 carries 2 GB. Quadro M2200 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro M2200 and 256-bit on the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Quadro M2200) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370) — the Quadro M2200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	256-bit+300%
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro M2200) vs 12 (11_1) (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_1)
Vulkan	1.4+17%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M2200) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370). Decoder: 2nd Gen NVDEC vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC (Quadro M2200) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370).

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
Encoder	5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)	VCE 1.0
Decoder	2nd Gen NVDEC	UVD 4.0
Codecs	H.264,HEVC	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro M2200 draws 55W versus the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370's 110W — a 66.7% difference. The Quadro M2200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M2200) vs 450W (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70.

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
TDP	55W-50%	110W
Recommended PSU	350W-22%	450W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	1x 6-pin
Length	—	220mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	80°C	70-13%
Perf/Watt	78.1+102%	38.7

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro M2200 came in at $500, while the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 launched at $149. On MSRP, Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 was 70.2% cheaper ($351 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 8.6 (Quadro M2200) vs 28.6 (Radeon R9 270 / R7 370) — the Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 offers 232.6% better value. The newer card here is Quadro M2200 (2017 vs 2015).

Feature	Quadro M2200	Radeon R9 270 / R7 370
MSRP	$500	$149-70%
Performance per Dollar	8.6	28.6+233%
Codename	GM206	Trinidad
Release	January 11 2017	May 5 2015
Ranking	#479	#456

Search Quadro M2200 on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 270 / R7 370 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.