AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows two benchmark tests where both products were measured with identical workloads: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The results split cleanly, with each card taking one victory.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 scores 11,431 against the AMD Radeon Pro 455's 10,336. That is a 9.6% advantage for NVIDIA in this compute API. The margin is meaningful but not overwhelming; it reflects a real performance gap in OpenCL workloads, but the AMD card remains within striking distance. For users whose applications rely primarily on OpenCL, the Quadro K2200 is the stronger choice based on this measurement.

The Vulkan result flips the outcome decisively. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 12,240, while the Quadro K2200 manages only 10,090. That gives AMD a 21.3% lead, a substantial margin that dwarfs NVIDIA's OpenCL advantage. Vulkan is increasingly relevant for modern rendering and compute tasks, so this win carries significant weight for current-generation workloads. The AMD card more than doubles the percentage advantage NVIDIA holds in OpenCL, making it the better option for Vulkan-centric tasks.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all recorded tests, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 posts 12,831, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 averages 10,761. That is a difference of roughly 2,070 points, or about 19% in AMD's favor. The AMD card also sits at the 52nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, compared to the 49th percentile for the Quadro K2200. Both cards occupy the middle of the performance distribution, but the Radeon Pro 455 sits slightly higher.

The AMD card's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, 0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847, -0.1%), and the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870, -0.3%). The Quadro K2200's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (10,804, -0.4%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10,690, 0.7%), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10,883, -1.1%). These comparisons place the Radeon Pro 455 in company with much older high-end desktop cards, while the Quadro K2200 aligns with entry-level and older midrange parts.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different manufacturing generations and foundries. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 uses the GM107 chip based on Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node advantage is substantial: 14 nm versus 28 nm. This explains much of the efficiency difference between the two.

Transistor counts reflect the design philosophies. The AMD chip packs 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, for a density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. AMD achieves roughly double the transistor density on a smaller die, a direct consequence of the more advanced process node. The smaller die also suggests lower manufacturing cost per wafer, though pricing data is not recorded here.

The Radeon Pro 455 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. The Quadro K2200 counters with 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. AMD fields 128 more shaders and 8 more TMUs, while ROP counts are identical. Despite the AMD card's higher shader count, the NVIDIA card posts higher pixel and texture rates. The Quadro K2200 reaches 17.98 GPixel/s pixel rate and 44.96 GTexel/s texture rate, while the Radeon Pro 455 manages 13.68 GPixel/s and 41.04 GTexel/s. Clock speeds explain this inversion: the Quadro K2200 runs at 1046 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost, while the Radeon Pro 455 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database.

Memory configurations differ in capacity but not in bus width. Both cards use GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. The Radeon Pro 455 offers 2 GB with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth and memory clocked at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). The Quadro K2200 offers 4 GB with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth and memory clocked at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The AMD card has a slight bandwidth edge of about 1.1 GB/s, but the NVIDIA card doubles the capacity. For memory-heavy workloads, 4 GB provides more headroom for larger datasets.

Compute throughput shows a modest NVIDIA lead in FP32: 1,438.7 GFLOPS versus 1,313.3 GFLOPS. The AMD card also supports FP16 at 1,313.3 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Quadro K2200 has no recorded FP16 capability. The Radeon Pro 455 draws 35 W TDP with an MXM Module slot width and no power connectors. The Quadro K2200 draws 68 W TDP in a single-slot form factor, also with no power connectors, but recommends a 250 W system PSU. The AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

API support differs in important ways. The Radeon Pro 455 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Quadro K2200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA has the newer Vulkan version, but AMD has the higher DirectX feature level. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the AMD card, while the NVIDIA card provides 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a split decision based on workload. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is the stronger card overall, with a 19% higher average benchmark score and a 21.3% lead in Vulkan. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 wins OpenCL by 9.6% and offers double the memory capacity. Users should choose the Radeon Pro 455 for Vulkan-based applications and general performance, and the Quadro K2200 for OpenCL-centric workloads or tasks that need more than 2 GB of VRAM. The AMD card also delivers superior efficiency at 35 W versus 68 W, making it the better fit for thermally constrained systems. The Quadro K2200's 4 GB frame buffer gives it a longevity advantage for larger assets, but the Radeon Pro 455's raw compute lead and modern architecture make it the more capable all-rounder.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 12,240 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 21.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2200's 10,090.

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 scores 11,431 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the AMD Radeon Pro 455's 10,336 by 9.6%.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has 2 GB of GDDR5, while the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 has 4 GB of GDDR5. Both use a 128-bit memory bus.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a 35 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot width. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 has a 68 W TDP, is single-slot, and recommends a 250 W system PSU.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How do these cards rank among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 sits at the 52nd percentile with an average benchmark score of 12,831. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 sits at the 49th percentile with an average score of 10,761.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 wins in Vulkan performance, average benchmark score, and efficiency. Its 21.3% Vulkan lead makes it the preferred choice for modern graphics APIs. The card's 35 W TDP versus 68 W means it generates less heat and suits compact or mobile form factors. Its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface provides higher per-lane bandwidth than the Quadro K2200's PCIe 2.0 x16. The AMD card also offers FP16 compute at 1:1 ratio, which the NVIDIA card lacks entirely. Higher transistor density on a smaller die suggests a more modern design overall.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 wins in OpenCL, memory capacity, and raw throughput rates. Its 9.6% OpenCL advantage matters for legacy compute workloads. The 4 GB frame buffer is double the AMD card's 2 GB, which helps with larger textures and datasets. The Quadro K2200 also posts higher pixel rate (17.98 GPixel/s vs 13.68 GPixel/s) and higher texture rate (44.96 GTexel/s vs 41.04 GTexel/s), plus higher FP32 throughput (1,438.7 GFLOPS vs 1,313.3 GFLOPS). Its 1046 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost clocks are recorded, while the AMD card has no recorded base or boost. The NVIDIA card also supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version than the AMD card's Vulkan 1.3. The Quadro K2200's predecessor and successor are recorded as Quadro Fermi and Quadro Maxwell, showing a clear product lineage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 455 | NVIDIA Quadro K2200 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not recorded | 1046 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not recorded | 1124 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Bandwidth | 81.28 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 640 |

| TMUs | 48 | 40 |

| ROPs | 16 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 13.68 GPixel/s | 17.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 41.04 GTexel/s | 44.96 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,313.3 GFLOPS | 1,438.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 35 W | 68 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2016-10-29 | 2014-07-21 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |