AMD FirePro W5000 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data paints a clear picture: the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is the dominant performer in this pairing, winning the only direct head-to-head benchmark by a substantial margin. The AMD FirePro W5000, while a capable card in its own right, is decisively outclassed in raw compute and modern API support. For users requiring maximum OpenCL throughput and the ability to handle newer graphics workloads, the Quadro P2200 is the only logical choice. The FirePro W5000 still holds relevance only for legacy applications or scenarios where its specific feature set is mandatory, but the benchmark evidence does not favor it in any measurable way.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows only one direct comparison, and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 wins that test outright. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 against the FirePro W5000’s 9,803, a delta of -69.7% from the FirePro’s perspective. This means the Quadro P2200 delivers more than three times the compute throughput in that workload. There are no benchmark categories in the database where the FirePro W5000 emerges victorious.

Beyond the single head-to-head, the Quadro P2200 also has a broader benchmark footprint. The database includes nine recorded scores for the Quadro P2200, covering OpenCL, Vulkan, multiple DirectX versions, and compute-specific tests. The FirePro W5000 has only one recorded benchmark score. This suggests the Quadro P2200 is validated across a wider range of workloads, from legacy DirectX 9 (167 in Passmark) to modern Vulkan (31,351 in Geekbench). The FirePro’s lone score cannot demonstrate comparable versatility.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras and design philosophies. The AMD FirePro W5000 uses the Pitcairn chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It packs 2,800 million transistors into a 212 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 uses the GP106 chip with Pascal architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a more advanced 16 nm process. It contains 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, achieving 22.0M transistors per mm².

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The FirePro W5000 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P2200 offers 5 GB of GDDR5X on a narrower 160-bit bus, yet achieves 200.2 GB/s, nearly double the bandwidth. The Quadro also operates its memory at 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) versus the FirePro’s 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective).

Compute resources favor the Quadro P2200 across the board. It has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 40 ROPs. The FirePro W5000 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate is more than double on the Quadro (59.72 GPixel/s vs 26.40 GPixel/s), and texture rate is roughly triple (119.4 GTexel/s vs 39.60 GTexel/s). FP32 performance is also dramatically higher: 3.822 TFLOPS on the Quadro versus 1,267.2 GFLOPS on the FirePro.

Feature support also diverges. The Quadro P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro W5000 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Display outputs differ as well: the FirePro offers 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the Quadro provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Physical dimensions are similar in height (111 mm for both), but the Quadro is longer at 201 mm versus 183 mm.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is significantly faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 32,344 versus the AMD FirePro W5000’s 9,803, a 69.7% advantage.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Quadro P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the FirePro W5000 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). This means the Quadro can handle more recent DirectX 12 feature levels.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X memory, while the FirePro W5000 has 2 GB of GDDR5. The Quadro also delivers nearly double the memory bandwidth (200.2 GB/s vs 102.4 GB/s).

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the FirePro W5000 wins?

A: Based on the recorded data, no. The only direct head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench OpenCL) is won by the Quadro P2200. The FirePro has no wins in any category.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient per unit of compute?

A: The data does not provide a direct efficiency metric, but both cards have a TDP of 75 W. The Quadro P2200 delivers 3.822 TFLOPS at that TDP, while the FirePro W5000 delivers 1,267.2 GFLOPS, indicating the Quadro produces far more compute per watt.

Q: What is the production status of these cards?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The FirePro W5000 was released in August 2012, and the Quadro P2200 was released in June 2019.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 32,344, while the AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9,803. The delta percentage is -69.7%, meaning the FirePro trails by that amount. This is not a marginal difference; it is a three-fold performance gap. The Quadro P2200’s score places it in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W5000 sits in the 47th percentile, despite the FirePro’s much lower absolute score. This percentile discrepancy is explained by the fact that the database’s percentile ranking is based on the average benchmark score across all recorded tests, and the FirePro’s single score may be weighted differently than the Quadro’s nine scores.

The Quadro P2200’s additional benchmarks provide context for its versatility. In Vulkan, it scores 31,351, nearly matching its OpenCL performance. Passmark tests show a G3D score of 9,364 and a compute score of 3,921. DirectX 9 yields 167, DirectX 11 yields 70, DirectX 10 yields 45, and DirectX 12 yields 33. The G2D score is 881. These numbers cannot be compared to the FirePro because the FirePro lacks corresponding entries, but they demonstrate the Quadro’s ability to handle a wide range of graphics APIs.

The FirePro W5000’s nearest rivals in the database are all NVIDIA or Intel products: the GeForce GTX 1070 (delta 0.2%), Quadro M2000M (delta -0.3%), Quadro 6000 (delta -0.4%), and Tesla M10 (delta 0.8%). This suggests the FirePro’s OpenCL score is in a competitive range with older mid-range NVIDIA parts. The Quadro P2200’s nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 460 v2 (delta -0.7%), GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (delta -0.7%), AMD FirePro W5170M (delta 1.1%), and Intel Arc A380 (delta 1.5%). This indicates the Quadro P2200’s average score is comparable to a mix of older and newer consumer GPUs, even though its OpenCL result is far higher than its average.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards:

• Process node: 28 nm (FirePro W5000) vs 16 nm (Quadro P2200)
• Transistors: 2,800 million vs 4,400 million
• Die size: 212 mm² vs 200 mm²
• Transistor density: 13.2M / mm² vs 22.0M / mm²
• Memory size: 2 GB vs 5 GB
• Memory type: GDDR5 vs GDDR5X
• Memory bus width: 256 bit vs 160 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 102.4 GB/s vs 200.2 GB/s
• Shading units: 768 vs 1,280
• TMUs: 48 vs 80
• ROPs: 32 vs 40
• Pixel rate: 26.40 GPixel/s vs 59.72 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 39.60 GTexel/s vs 119.4 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 1,267.2 GFLOPS vs 3.822 TFLOPS
• DirectX support: 12 (11_1) vs 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.2.170 vs 1.4
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 vs 4x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Length: 183 mm vs 201 mm
• Release date: August 2012 vs June 2019
• Predecessor: FirePro Terascale vs Quadro Maxwell
• Successor: Radeon Pro Polaris vs Quadro Volta
• Launch MSRP: 599 USD vs not provided

Both cards share a 75 W TDP, single-slot design, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 250 W, PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, OpenGL 4.6 support, and 111 mm height. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores.