AMD Radeon R7 M380 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one direct benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and the AMD Radeon R7 M380: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this measurement, the Quadro K2200 scores 11431 points, while the Radeon R7 M380 scores 9313 points. That is a 22.7% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a substantial margin in compute workloads. The Quadro K2200 also holds an average benchmark score of 10761 across all recorded tests, compared to 9313 for the Radeon R7 M380. The Quadro’s single OpenCL result sits above its own average, while the Radeon’s only recorded benchmark is its average, so the gap in this specific test is representative of the broader performance difference.

Looking at the percentile rankings, the Quadro K2200 lands at the 49th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Radeon R7 M380 sits at the 46th percentile. This places both cards in the mid-range of the performance distribution, but the Quadro is clearly ahead within that band. The nearest rivals for the Quadro K2200 illustrate its position: the AMD Radeon Pro 450 averages 10804 points, which is 0.4% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 averages 10883 points, 1.1% higher. The Quadro K2200 is effectively trading blows with those cards, all within roughly a single percentage point. Its other close rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti at 10690 points (0.7% below) and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S at 10629 points (1.2% below).

The Radeon R7 M380’s nearest rivals tell a similar story but at a lower performance tier. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M averages 9302 points, just 0.1% below the Radeon, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 averages 9294 points, 0.2% below. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 averages 9273 points, 0.4% below, and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 averages 9221 points, 1% below. The Radeon R7 M380 is essentially tied with these cards, none of which reach the 9400-point mark. This means the Quadro K2200 is not merely faster than the Radeon R7 M380; it is competing in a completely different performance class, roughly 15% above the Radeon’s closest peers.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 uses the GM107 chip built on the Maxwell architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 1,870 million transistors into a 148 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0, also built by TSMC on 28 nm, but with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The Quadro has a slightly larger and more transistor-dense chip, which correlates with its higher compute throughput.

The compute resources are identical in count: both cards feature 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The difference comes from clock speeds. The Quadro K2200 runs at a base clock of 1046 MHz with a boost of 1124 MHz, while the Radeon R7 M380 runs at 900 MHz base and 915 MHz boost. That clock advantage translates directly into throughput numbers. The Quadro achieves 1,438.7 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, 44.96 GTexel/s of texture fill, and 17.98 GPixel/s of pixel fill. The Radeon manages 1,171.2 GFLOPS, 36.60 GTexel/s, and 14.64 GPixel/s. Across every measured throughput metric, the Quadro holds a lead of roughly 20% to 23%, consistent with the OpenCL benchmark delta.

Memory subsystems diverge significantly. The Quadro K2200 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with a memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R7 M380 also has 4 GB on a 128-bit bus, but it uses DDR3 at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), producing only 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a 2.5 times bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA card, a massive difference for memory-bound workloads. The bus interface also differs: the Quadro uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Radeon uses PCIe 3.0 x16, although the Radeon’s bandwidth advantage there is unlikely to compensate for its much slower memory.

API support is close but not identical. Both cards support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro K2200 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon R7 M380 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX feature levels differ slightly: the Quadro is rated for DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Radeon is rated for DirectX 12 (11_1). Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The Quadro K2200 is a single-slot card that requires no power connectors and has a 68 W TDP with a suggested 250 W power supply. The Radeon R7 M380 has no recorded TDP, slot width, or power connector data in the database, which is typical for a mobile-oriented part. The Quadro includes display outputs of 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the Radeon has no recorded display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 scores 11431 in Geekbench OpenCL, versus 9313 for the AMD Radeon R7 M380, a 22.7% difference. The Quadro also has a higher average benchmark score of 10761 versus 9313.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Quadro K2200 is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (0.4% lower), NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (1.1% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (0.7% lower), and AMD Radeon RX 6600S (1.2% lower). The Radeon R7 M380 is tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (0.1% higher), GTX 465 (0.2% higher), GTX 960 (0.4% higher), and AMD Radeon Vega 8 (1% higher).

Q: Do the two cards have the same memory bandwidth?

A: No. The Quadro K2200 has 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth from GDDR5 memory, while the Radeon R7 M380 has 32.00 GB/s from DDR3. Both have 4 GB capacity on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The Quadro K2200 runs at 1046 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. The Radeon R7 M380 runs at 900 MHz base and 915 MHz boost.

Q: What are the API differences?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro K2200 supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (11_0). The Radeon R7 M380 supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The Quadro K2200 was released on 2014-07-21, and the Radeon R7 M380 was released on 2015-05-04.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute performance: the NVIDIA Quadro K2200. Its 22.7% OpenCL advantage over the Radeon R7 M380 is supported by every other metric in the database. The Quadro has higher clocks, roughly 23% more FP32 throughput, 23% more texture fill, 23% more pixel fill, and 2.5 times the memory bandwidth. The Radeon’s only advantages are a newer PCIe generation (3.0 versus 2.0), a slightly higher DirectX feature level (11_1 versus 11_0), and a later release date. For any workload that stresses compute or memory bandwidth, the Quadro K2200 is the better choice.

The Radeon R7 M380 is not without merit, but its merits are contextual. It belongs to a performance tier where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M, GTX 465, GTX 960, and AMD Radeon Vega 8 all land within 1% of its score. If the choice is between the Quadro K2200 and the Radeon R7 M380 specifically, the Quadro wins outright. If the choice is between the Radeon R7 M380 and its nearest rivals, the differences are negligible, all within a single percentage point. The Quadro K2200’s nearest rivals, by contrast, are the Radeon Pro 450, GeForce MX350, GTX 560 Ti, and RX 6600S, all of which sit in a higher performance band.

Neither card is current. Both are end-of-life, and neither has modern features like ray tracing or tensor cores. The Quadro K2200 is a desktop workstation card with a 68 W TDP, single-slot design, and no power connectors. The Radeon R7 M380 lacks recorded power or physical dimensions, which suggests it was designed for mobile systems. A buyer with a desktop workstation should choose the Quadro K2200 without hesitation. A buyer constrained to a mobile platform would be limited to the Radeon R7 M380, but should be aware that its performance is substantially below the Quadro.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in the following recorded specifications:

• Chip: Quadro K2200 uses GM107 (Maxwell); Radeon R7 M380 uses Tropo (GCN 1.0)
• Process node: Both are 28 nm at TSMC, but the Quadro has 1,870 million transistors on 148 mm² (12.6M / mm²), while the Radeon has 1,500 million on 123 mm² (12.2M / mm²)
• Base clock: 1046 MHz versus 900 MHz
• Boost clock: 1124 MHz versus 915 MHz
• Memory clock: 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective)
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus DDR3
• Memory bandwidth: 80.19 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s
• Pixel rate: 17.98 GPixel/s versus 14.64 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 44.96 GTexel/s versus 36.60 GTexel/s
• FP32 compute: 1,438.7 GFLOPS versus 1,171.2 GFLOPS
• TDP: 68 W versus not recorded
• Slot width: Single-slot versus not recorded
• Power connectors: None versus not recorded
• Suggested PSU: 250 W versus not recorded
• Bus interface: PCIe 2.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 versus not recorded
• DirectX: 12 (11_0) versus 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan: 1.4 versus 1.2.170
• Dimensions: 202 mm length, 111 mm height versus not recorded
• Release date: 2014-07-21 versus 2015-05-04
• Predecessor: Quadro Fermi versus Solar System
• Successor: Quadro Maxwell versus Polaris Mobile

Identical specifications include 4 GB memory capacity, 128-bit bus width, 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, 16 ROPs, OpenGL 4.6, and the absence of ray tracing and tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 wins in every measured benchmark and every performance-related specification. Its 22.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL covers general compute workloads. Its FP32 throughput of 1,438.7 GFLOPS versus 1,171.2 GFLOPS gives it a clear edge in floating-point math. Its texture rate of 44.96 GTexel/s versus 36.60 GTexel/s favors texturing workloads. Its pixel rate of 17.98 GPixel/s versus 14.64 GPixel/s favors fill-bound scenarios. Most striking is the memory bandwidth difference: 80.19 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s, which makes the Quadro dramatically better for any workload that streams large data sets, such as image processing, scientific compute, or CAD workloads. The Quadro is also the only card with recorded display outputs, a single-slot form factor, and no power connector requirement, making it easier to integrate into a desktop workstation.

The AMD Radeon R7 M380 wins in a few narrow specification areas. It has a newer PCIe interface at 3.0 x16 versus 2.0 x16, which provides a faster host connection in systems that support it. Its DirectX feature level of 11_1 is marginally higher than the Quadro’s 11_0. It was released later, on 2015-05-04 versus 2014-07-21, meaning it may appear in slightly newer laptops. Its nearest rivals are all within 1% of its score, so in a system where the Radeon is the only option, it performs on par with the GTX 850M, GTX 465, GTX 960, or Vega 8. The Radeon R7 M380 is not competitive with the Quadro K2200, but it sits in a sensible mid-range tier where its performance is entirely average.

For a practical builder, the use case determines the choice. Pick the Quadro K2200 for desktops, workstations, CAD, DCC, or any compute task. Pick the Radeon R7 M380 only if the platform requires it, such as a mobile system with no discrete NVIDIA option. The database shows a 22.7% performance gap in the only shared benchmark, and the specification table reinforces that gap across every throughput metric.