NVIDIA Quadro M2200
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

NVIDIA Quadro M2200: 694 MHz / 1038 MHz, 4 GB, 28 nm.

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16:  / 1190 MHz, 4 GB, 14 nm.


NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
General Information

Here is the comparison of NVIDIA Quadro M2200 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16  by the date of release, starting price at the production and the number of scores in the performing rating. Also, you can see the code name and the architecture of graphics cores.

Place in performance rating
Value for money (0-100)
no data
Code name
Vega 12
Mobile workstation
Mobile workstation
13 January 2017 (5 years ago)
Release date
15 November 2018 (3 years ago)
Price now
Value for money
GPU code name
Vega Mobile
Mobile workstation
Market segment
Mobile workstation

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Technical Specifications

It is the important section of comparison between NVIDIA Quadro M2200 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 which depict real speed of graphics processors, technology of production and the number of transistors. Here you learn which TDP GPUs have and whether it is possible to run them in the mode of overclocking.

694 MHz
Core clock speed
no data
1038 MHz
Boost Clock
1190 MHz
1870 Million
Transistor count
no data
28 nm
Manufacturing process technology
14 nm
55 Watt
Power consumption (TDP)
75 Watt
Texture fill rate
Pipelines / CUDA cores
1038 MHz
Boost clock speed
1190 MHz
1870 Million
Number of transistors
no data
55 Watt
Thermal design power (TDP)
75 Watt

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Dimensions and Compatibility

Comparing NVIDIA Quadro M2200 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, it is important to note the dimensions (length, width, and weight), interface and connectors.

MXM-A (3.0)
PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors
no data
Laptop size

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Graphics memory (technical specifications)

GPUs’ memory influences the speed of the processing of the calculation, rendering, drawing of graphics in games and many more. The bigger the GPU memory is, the more modern its standard (for example, GDDR6X) is. The higher the clock speed and capacity is, the better it is. It is time to know which GPU, NVIDIA Quadro M2200 or AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 , has a better memory.

Memory type
4 GB
Maximum RAM amount
4 GB
128 Bit
Memory bus width
1024 Bit
5508 MHz
Memory clock speed
2400 MHz
88 GB/s
Memory bandwidth
307.2 GB/s
Shared memory

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Port and Display Support

Let’s compare NVIDIA Quadro M2200 and NVIDIA Quadro M2200 by the type of connectors, their number and the standard for connecting a monitor.

No outputs
Display Connectors
No outputs
Display Port
no data

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

Brand technology, used by companies for improving their production, is not accounted for the performing rating but can be useful for comparing the specs.

no data
no data
3D Vision Pro
no data
3D Stereo
no data
no data
nView Display Management
no data
no data

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
API support

The technology of the development complexes has various versions. Learn what the difference between NVIDIA Quadro M2200 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 in these parameters is.

12 (12_1)
Shader Model

Performance and Games

The comparison of GPU#1 and GPU#2 in games shows the amount of FPS in any resolution. The testing was carried out at the stock assembly without overclocking, so the information can be different from the requested parameters.

Horizon Zero Dawn (2020) NVIDIA Quadro M2200
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Death Stranding (2020) NVIDIA Quadro M2200
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
F1 2020 (2020) NVIDIA Quadro M2200
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Gears Tactics (2020) NVIDIA Quadro M2200
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Doom Eternal (2020) NVIDIA Quadro M2200
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
5 Stutter
May Stutter
30 Fluent – 25 fps +
40 Fluent – 35 fps +
60 Fluent – 55 fps +
May Run Fluently
? Uncertain
no data

Advantages of NVIDIA Quadro M2200

Less power consumption (55 Watt vs 75 Watt)

Advantages of AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16

1.33% faster in synthetic tests

Cheaper ($511 vs $1967)

Finer manufacturing process technology (14 nm vs 28 nm)

More memory bandwidth (307.2 GB/s vs 88 GB/s)

So, NVIDIA Quadro M2200 or AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16?

Which video card is better and more powerful? We recommend AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 .

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 in benchmarks comparison

GPU Benchmark performance

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

3DMark Ice Storm is a modern synthetic benchmark for GPUs, used for evaluating performance in rendering. In 3DMark Ice Storm, you can check how fast a GPU of the old generation is and make conclusions about its modernization.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

As 3DMark Cloud Gate Benchmark supports DirectX 10, its evaluation is rather suitable for GPUs of a medium level or the ones released 4 years ago.

3DMark Fire Strike Score

3DMark Company has created a benchmark for GPUs called "Fire Strike Score", which points to the definite scenarios for fulfilling different variants and conditions of GPU running. The higher the evaluation of the 3DMark "Fire Strike Score" is, the more performing and faster a GPU is.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

3DMark Fire Strike is a benchmark of GPUs, which reflects a GPU's testing results under factory conditions without overclocking, making it the most realistic in contrast to the custom dimensions of performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

Being one of the most popular benchmarks for GPUs by far, 3DMark 11 is the authority among other programmes evaluating running or gaming performance. It supports tessellation, various calculating scenarios and account multithreading in GPUs testing.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage Performance Benchmark accounts a GPU performance in multithreading that completely reveals all the potential of a graphics core and memory. Check the results to understand which GPU is better in the benchmark.

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

The benchmark by the SPECviewperf 12 Company with Solidworks version allows evaluating GPU performance in the rendering of Audi R8, Black Owl, Digger, Ferrari, Menjac, SpaceShipCrawler and a supercar. Check benchmark results to make the right decision.

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

SPECviewperf 12 Benchmark with the number of scenarios Siemens NX operates on the version of the apps snx-02 and is used for testing GPU in Car Engine 3D Modelling. Learn the results.

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

SPECviewperf 12 Benchmark with the scenario of Showcase tests a GPU in the modelling of models taking into account using various effects of blackout and shadowing.

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

SPECviewperf 12 Benchmark with the scenario of Medical is one of the most complicated GPUs because of using complex 4D medical graphics models upon testing. It was developed by the Department of Radiology at Stanford School of Medicine. It is very suitable for testing modern GPU models.

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

SPECviewperf 12 Benchmark with the special set of Maya scripts is a universal evaluating tool for calculating GPU power in 3D Modelling. The different visual effects involving memory and graphics processor are applied in the benchmark.

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

The benchmark by SPECviewperf 12 was released under the code name Energy. In the benchmark, apart from testing desktop GPUs, you can see the mobile ones installed in laptops.

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

SPECviewperf 12 Benchmark has been created with the code name Creo, which tests GPUs' performance in Cars and Aircraft 3D Modelling.

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

The benchmark of SPECviewperf 12 with the code name Catia tests a GPU in 3D Modelling using various visual effects. The objects of rendering are aircraft, an SUV and a car.

Passmark GPU

It is professional testing of a GPU in the authoritative benchmark Passmark, which millions of users around the world trust. Only Passmark is able to give the complete picture of GPU performance in our rating, which you can see in this section.

Is the NVIDIA Quadro M2200 better than AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16? - UltimatePCtech Rating.

4.0 Out of User Rating
4.0 Out of User Rating