AMD Radeon R7 350 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 delivers 3.822 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon R7 350 delivers 819.2 GFLOPS. The Quadro P2200 is roughly 4.7 times faster in theoretical peak FP32 throughput.

Q: What are the memory configurations of each card?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, yielding 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R7 350 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s. The Quadro has 128.2 GB/s more memory bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The Quadro P2200, built on a 16 nm process, packs 4,400 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, for a density of 22.0M / mm². The R7 350, on a 28 nm process, has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for 12.2M / mm². The Quadro has nearly 10 million more transistors per square millimeter.

Q: How do they compare in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The Quadro P2200 scores 31,351 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R7 350 scores 7,057. That is a 344.3% advantage for the Quadro P2200, the largest margin in any shared benchmark.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro P2200 has a TDP of 75 W, and the R7 350 has a TDP of 55 W. Both require a suggested 250 W power supply and use no external power connectors.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The Quadro P2200 was released on 2019-06-09, while the R7 350 was released on 2016-07-05. The Quadro is roughly three years newer.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the NVIDIA Quadro P2200. It wins 2 of the 2 head-to-head benchmarks, with no wins recorded for the AMD Radeon R7 350. However, the nature of the wins reveals distinct use-case strengths.

The Quadro P2200 dominates in compute-heavy and API-modern workloads. Its 315.1% margin in Geekbench OpenCL and 344.3% margin in Geekbench Vulkan demonstrate that any application leveraging general-purpose GPU compute, ray tracing acceleration via Vulkan, or OpenCL-based rendering will heavily favor this card. The 5 GB frame buffer and 200.2 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets, multi-monitor professional visualization, and GPU-accelerated rendering tasks.

The R7 350, despite losing both benchmarks, is not without a niche. Its 55 W TDP and single-slot design make it a low-power option for basic display output. With 2 GB of GDDR5 and a 128-bit bus, it can handle light 2D workloads and older APIs. Its smaller 168 mm length makes it easier to fit into compact chassis. The data shows it is in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, versus the Quadro P2200's 44th percentile, so the gap is modest in the broader pool. For simple multi-monitor setups or legacy systems needing a DisplayPort 1.2 output, the R7 350 can suffice, but it has no performance advantage in any tested metric.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Quadro P2200 uses NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, built on the GP106 chip. Pascal is a mature design with a focus on improved memory compression, better scheduling, and support for modern API features like DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4. The R7 350 uses AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture, the original Graphics Core Next design, on the Cape Verde chip. GCN 1.0 is an older architecture that still supports DirectX 12, but only at feature level 11_1, and Vulkan at 1.2.170.

The process node difference is substantial. The Quadro P2200 is fabricated on TSMC's 16 nm node, while the R7 350 uses TSMC's 28 nm node. This is a major generational leap that affects transistor density, clock potential, and power efficiency. The Quadro P2200 packs 4,400 million transistors, nearly triple the R7 350's 1,500 million, into a die that is only 200 mm² versus the R7 350's 123 mm². The denser design allows for significantly more functional units.

The Quadro P2200 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The R7 350 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a 768-shader-unit, 48-TMU, and 24-ROP advantage for the Quadro. The Quadro also features memory clock speeds of 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) on GDDR5X, while the R7 350 uses 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps) on regular GDDR 5. The Quadro supports 4 DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the R7 350 has a more limited set: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

Both cards have no ray tracing or tensor cores, and both are single-slot with no external power connectors. The Quadro P2200 is the successor to Quadro Maxwell and is itself succeeded by Quadro Volta. The R7 350's predecessor was Volcanic Islands and its successor is Arctic Islands.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | AMD Radeon R7 350 |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 22.0M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 1,280 | 512 |

| TMUs | 80 | 32 |

| ROPs | 40 | 16 |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 160 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 200.2 GB/s | 72.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) |

| Pixel Rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | 12.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 119.4 GTexel/s | 25.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.822 TFLOPS | 819.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) | N/A |

| TDP | 75 W | 55 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2019-06-09 | 2016-07-05 |

| Length | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | 168 mm (6.6 inches) |

The above table lists only the fields where the two cards differ. They share the same foundry (TSMC), PCI Express interface (PCIe 3.0 x16), single-slot design, and lack of power connectors. Both are end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two common benchmark results for both cards: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 wins both, and the margins are significant.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 versus 7,792 for the R7 350. That is a 315.1% advantage, meaning the Quadro is over four times faster in this compute workload. This result aligns with the raw FP32 numbers: 3.822 TFLOPS versus 819.2 GFLOPS. OpenCL workloads that can utilize the full shading array will see dramatic scaling. The 5 GB memory footprint also helps with data residency, avoiding paging for larger datasets.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro P2200 scores 31,351 versus 7,057 for the R7 350. The delta is even larger at 344.3%. Vulkan is a lower-level API, and the Pascal architecture's improved scheduling and memory subsystem likely contribute to this wider gap. The GDDR5X memory running at 10 Gbps effective provides 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is nearly three times the R7 350's 72.00 GB/s. For memory-bound Vulkan workloads, this is a decisive factor.

The overall average benchmark score tells the same story: the Quadro P2200 averages 8,686 points across all its recorded benchmarks, while the R7 350 averages 7,425. This places the Quadro P2200 at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, and the R7 350 at the 40th percentile. The Quadro P2200 sits between the GeForce GTX 460 v2 (8,743) and the FirePro W5170M (8,595) in the average score ranking, with a delta of -0.7% and +1.1%, respectively. The R7 350 sits between the UHD Graphics 750 (7,441, -0.2%) and the GeForce GTX 1650 (7,472, -0.6%).

Neither card has any DirectX benchmark scores in the shared set, so the comparison is limited to the OpenCL and Vulkan tests. However, the pattern is unambiguous: the Quadro P2200 is the faster card in every measured metric. The R7 350's lower TDP (55 W vs 75 W) and shorter length might be its only practical advantages, but in terms of performance, the Quadro P2200 leads by a wide margin across all tested workloads.