AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and AMD Radeon Pro 5300M are both end-of-life professional mobile/workstation graphics solutions, but they come from different eras and design philosophies. The K2200, built on NVIDIA’s Maxwell architecture with a 28 nm process, launched in 2014, while the Radeon Pro 5300M uses AMD’s RDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm node and debuted in 2019. The benchmark data shows a clear generational gap: the AMD card wins both head-to-head tests by wide margins, yet the K2200’s average score across all benchmarks sits slightly higher due to the mix of tests available for each. This analysis breaks down the specific numbers, architectural differences, and use-case implications from the provided data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 has an average benchmark score of 10761, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M averages 10013. However, the K2200’s average is based on only two tests (OpenCL and Vulkan), whereas the AMD card’s average includes ten tests, including Metal, PassMark, and compute workloads.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M scores 29252 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the K2200’s 11431. This gives the AMD card a 60.9% lead in that test, which is the largest delta among the head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: What is the transistor count and process node difference?

A: The Quadro K2200 uses 1,870 million transistors on a 28 nm TSMC process, while the Radeon Pro 5300M packs 6,400 million transistors on a 7 nm TSMC node. The newer AMD chip also has a much higher transistor density: 40.5M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm² for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Which card supports DirectX 12 at a higher feature level?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each card?

A: The K2200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 5300M also has 4 GB but uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 192.0 GB/s—more than double the NVIDIA card.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare in average score?

A: The K2200’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (10804, -0.4% delta), while the Radeon Pro 5300M’s nearest is the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M (10043, -0.3% delta). Both cards sit near the 49th and 48th percentile of all GPUs, respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M wins in every head-to-head benchmark listed. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 29252 versus the K2200’s 11431, a staggering 60.9% advantage. The Vulkan test is similarly lopsided: 27912 for AMD versus 10090 for NVIDIA, a 63.9% delta. These are the only two direct comparisons in the data, and the AMD card dominates both. For compute-heavy workloads like OpenCL or Vulkan-based rendering, the Radeon Pro 5300M is the clear performer.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2200, however, holds a slight edge in average benchmark score (10761 vs 10013) because its average is drawn from fewer, higher-scoring tests relative to its rivals. Its percentile rank (49th) is also marginally better than the AMD card’s 48th. This suggests that in a narrow set of legacy or driver-optimized workloads, the K2200 may remain competitive, but the data does not include any tests where it outright beats the 5300M. The AMD card also offers PassMark scores across DirectX 9/10/11/12 (80, 36, 37, 25 respectively), G2D (582), G3D (5918), and GPU compute (2658), which are not available for the K2200—meaning the NVIDIA part’s win in average score is partly an artifact of missing data.

For mobile or portable deployments, the Radeon Pro 5300M has no listed slot width or power connector, and its display outputs are “Portable Device Dependent,” indicating it is designed for laptops. The K2200 is a single-slot card with 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, and it requires a 250 W suggested PSU. The AMD card’s higher TDP (85 W vs 68 W) suggests it may need better cooling, but its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface (versus PCIe 2.0 x16 on the K2200) offers more modern bandwidth per lane.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design generations. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 is built on the Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a density of 12.6M per mm². The Radeon Pro 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip with AMD’s RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm node. This newer process allows 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die—a density of 40.5M per mm², over three times higher.

The AMD card has twice the shading units (1280 vs 640), twice the texture mapping units (80 vs 40), and twice the ROPs (32 vs 16) compared to the NVIDIA part. This directly explains its higher theoretical rates: the Radeon Pro 5300M achieves 40.00 GPixel/s pixel fill rate and 100.0 GTexel/s texture rate, versus 17.98 GPixel/s and 44.96 GTexel/s on the K2200. The FP32 compute is also dramatically different: 3.200 TFLOPS for AMD versus 1,438.7 GFLOPS for NVIDIA. Additionally, the Radeon Pro 5300M supports FP16 at 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature absent from the K2200’s specifications.

Memory architecture diverges as well. The K2200 uses GDDR5 at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the Radeon Pro 5300M uses GDDR6 at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Both have 4 GB capacity and 128-bit buses, but the AMD card’s bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s is more than double the NVIDIA’s 80.19 GB/s. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 2.0 x16 for the K2200 versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Radeon Pro 5300M. Neither card has RT or tensor cores, and both are end-of-life products.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K2200 | AMD Radeon Pro 5300M |

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

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 1,870 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 148 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1046 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 1250 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 40 | 80 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 17.98 GPixel/s | 40.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 44.96 GTexel/s | 100.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 1,438.7 GFLOPS | 3.200 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | None | 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 68 W | 85 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

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

| Release Date | 2014-07-21 | 2019-11-12 |

The K2200 has a higher base clock (1046 MHz vs 1000 MHz), but the Radeon Pro 5300M boosts higher (1250 MHz vs 1124 MHz). The NVIDIA card has a lower TDP (68 W vs 85 W) and is explicitly a single-slot design with a 250 W suggested PSU, while the AMD card has no slot width, power connector, or PSU guidance listed. The K2200 is 202 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the Radeon Pro 5300M has no physical dimensions listed. The AMD card’s generation is listed as “Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile),” indicating a mobile-focused target, whereas the NVIDIA part is from the “Quadro Kepler (Kx200)” generation despite using the Maxwell chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two direct comparisons in the data heavily favor the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD card scores 29252 against the K2200’s 11431. That is a 60.9% delta in AMD’s favor—a massive margin that reflects not just the newer architecture but also the doubled shading units and memory bandwidth. For any OpenCL-based compute task, the Radeon Pro 5300M is the superior choice by a wide margin.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story. The Radeon Pro 5300M scores 27912, while the Quadro K2200 manages only 10090. The 63.9% delta is the largest in the entire head-to-head set. Vulkan workloads, which often benefit from modern driver overhead and higher memory throughput, clearly favor the AMD card. The K2200’s Maxwell architecture, designed for an earlier DirectX era, cannot keep up with RDNA 1.0’s compute efficiency.

Notably, the K2200’s OpenCL score (11431) is actually higher than its own Vulkan score (10090), suggesting that OpenCL is a relative strength for the NVIDIA card, even though it still loses to the AMD part in that test. The Radeon Pro 5300M’s scores are more balanced across APIs, with its Metal score (33626) being the highest of any benchmark listed. The K2200 has no Metal or PassMark results in the data, so its average score of 10761 is derived solely from the two Geekbench tests, which may inflate its perceived competitiveness.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is the outright winner in raw performance. It beats the Quadro K2200 by 60.9% in OpenCL and 63.9% in Vulkan, and it offers more than double the memory bandwidth, FP32 compute, pixel rate, and texture rate. Its 7 nm process and RDNA 1.0 architecture deliver 3.2 TFLOPS FP32 and 6.4 TFLOPS FP16, whereas the K2200 is limited to 1.44 TFLOPS FP32 with no FP16 support. For any modern compute or graphics workload—especially those leveraging OpenCL, Vulkan, or Metal—the Radeon Pro 5300M is the only rational choice from this pairing.

However, the K2200 is not without merit. Its average benchmark score (10761) is higher than the AMD card’s (10013), and it sits at the 49th percentile versus the 48th for the Radeon Pro 5300M. This is likely because the K2200’s average is based on two tests where it performs relatively well for its era, while the AMD card’s average includes lower PassMark results (e.g., 25 in DirectX 12, 36 in DirectX 10). The K2200 also has a lower TDP (68 W vs 85 W) and is a single-slot design with dedicated display outputs, making it more suitable for older workstation chassis that lack modern power delivery or cooling. Its PCIe 2.0 x16 interface is older, but for legacy applications that rely on fixed-function hardware or proprietary NVIDIA drivers, the K2200 may still function adequately.

The choice depends on the workload. If the task involves OpenCL or Vulkan compute, modern DirectX 12 (12_1) features, or any FP16 math, the Radeon Pro 5300M is categorically superior—the 60-64% deltas are too large to ignore. If the environment is legacy, power-constrained, or requires discrete display outputs on a single slot, the Quadro K2200 offers a lower-power fallback, though its architectural age and 80.19 GB/s bandwidth will bottleneck any demanding application. The data does not show a single test where the K2200 wins, so the verdict is straightforward: pick the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M for performance, or the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 only if specific legacy compatibility or power limits dictate otherwise.