AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single head-to-head benchmark result between these two cards, and it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 scores 11,431 points against the AMD Radeon R9 M265X's 8,851 points. That is a 29.1% advantage for the Quadro K2200, a substantial margin that places the two cards in clearly different performance tiers despite some superficial similarities in their compute configurations.

Context from the database's nearest-rival data reinforces this gap. The Quadro K2200's average benchmark score sits at 10,761, which places it in the 49th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The R9 M265X, by contrast, averages 8,851 points, landing in the 44th percentile. The Quadro K2200 runs neck-and-neck with cards like the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (10,804, a 0.4% deficit) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10,883, a 1.1% deficit), while sitting slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10,629, a 1.2% advantage). The R9 M265X, on the other hand, clusters with the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8,863, a 0.1% deficit), the AMD Radeon 550X (8,918, a 0.8% deficit), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746, a 1.2% advantage).

The OpenCL delta is the only direct comparison the database records, but it is telling. A 29.1% lead in a compute-heavy API like OpenCL suggests the Quadro K2200 will deliver meaningfully better throughput in GPU-accelerated workloads. The R9 M265X does not have a recorded Vulkan score in the database, while the Quadro K2200 posts 10,090 points there, so the NVIDIA card also demonstrates capable low-level API performance on its own.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 wins the only recorded head-to-head contest. Its 11,431 OpenCL score versus the R9 M265X's 8,851 is a clean sweep of the comparative results, and the database records 1 win for the Quadro K2200 and 0 wins for the AMD part.

The use-case split therefore follows the numbers. The Quadro K2200 is the card for OpenCL-accelerated tasks, which typically include compute workloads, some rendering pipelines, and certain productivity applications that offload work to the GPU. Its Vulkan score of 10,090 also indicates it can handle modern low-level graphics APIs competently, though there is no direct Vulkan comparison available against the R9 M265X.

The R9 M265X does not win any recorded benchmark, but its 44th percentile standing means it is not a slouch in absolute terms. It sits close to the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 and the Radeon 550X in average score, so in a system where the Quadro K2200 is not an option, the R9 M265X would still handle mainstream GPU tasks. The data, however, offers no scenario where the AMD card comes out ahead of the NVIDIA card in a direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 scores 11,431 points, which is 29.1% higher than the AMD Radeon R9 M265X's 8,851 points.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M265X beat the Quadro K2200 in any benchmark?

A: No. The database records 1 win for the Quadro K2200 and 0 wins for the R9 M265X in their head-to-head results.

Q: How does the Quadro K2200 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 10,761 is within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10,629), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10,690), 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (10,804), and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10,883).

Q: Where does the R9 M265X rank among its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 8,851 is 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8,863), 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon 550X (8,918), and 1.2% ahead of both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (8,743).

Q: Does the Quadro K2200 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it reports Vulkan 1.4 support and scores 10,090 in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The R9 M265X supports Vulkan 1.2.170 but has no recorded Vulkan benchmark score.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Quadro K2200 sits in the 49th percentile, while the R9 M265X sits in the 44th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across several key specification fields. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X has 2 GB. Both use a 128-bit memory bus, but the Quadro K2200 achieves 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth versus the R9 M265X's 64.00 GB/s. The memory clock differs as well: the Quadro K2200 runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the R9 M265X runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective).

Core clocks show a significant split. The Quadro K2200 has a base clock of 1046 MHz and a boost clock of 1124 MHz. The R9 M265X has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost clock of 625 MHz. The compute rates follow accordingly: the Quadro K2200 delivers 17.98 GPixel/s pixel rate, 44.96 GTexel/s texture rate, and 1,438.7 GFLOPS of FP32 performance. The R9 M265X delivers 10.00 GPixel/s, 25.00 GTexel/s, and 800.0 GFLOPS.

The bus interface differs: the Quadro K2200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the R9 M265X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The Quadro K2200 has a 68 W TDP, a single-slot form factor, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The R9 M265X has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or PSU recommendation. The Quadro K2200 lists display outputs as 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the R9 M265X has no recorded display outputs. The Quadro K2200 measures 202 mm in length and 111 mm in height; the R9 M265X has no recorded dimensions.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 is built on the GM107 chip using the Maxwell architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million transistors per mm². The R9 M265X uses the Venus chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, also from TSMC on 28 nm, but with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, resulting in 12.2 million transistors per mm².

Both cards have identical compute unit counts: 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The shading unit count being equal makes the clock speed difference the primary driver of the performance gap, as the Quadro K2200 runs at nearly double the base clock of the R9 M265X.

The API support differs in detail. The Quadro K2200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M265X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX feature level is slightly higher on the AMD card, but the Vulkan version is significantly newer on the NVIDIA card.

The generation and lineage fields also differ. The Quadro K2200 is listed under the "Quadro Kepler (Kx200)" generation despite its Maxwell architecture, with a predecessor of Quadro Fermi and a successor of Quadro Maxwell. The R9 M265X belongs to the "Gem System (R9 M200)" generation, with a predecessor of Solar System and a successor of Polaris Mobile. The Quadro K2200 was released on July 21, 2014, while the R9 M265X was released on March 20, 2014. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for most users. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 outperforms the AMD Radeon R9 M265X by 29.1% in the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, and it also carries a higher average benchmark score, a higher percentile ranking, double the memory capacity, and substantially higher clock speeds. The Quadro K2200 is the card to pick for anyone whose workload involves OpenCL compute, where its 11,431 score versus 8,851 demonstrates a meaningful real-world advantage. Its 4 GB memory buffer also gives it more headroom for larger datasets or higher-resolution textures.

The R9 M265X is not without merit in the broader context of the database. Its 44th percentile placement means it performs comparably to other mid-range cards of its era, and its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is newer than the Quadro K2200's PCIe 2.0 x16. For a system that already has an R9 M265X and where the workload is light, upgrading may not be urgent. But for a new purchase or a direct choice between these two, the Quadro K2200 wins on every recorded metric: raw performance, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput.

The Quadro K2200 also offers the advantage of a recorded Vulkan score (10,090), which gives some assurance of low-level API performance. The R9 M265X has no Vulkan benchmark in the database, so its capabilities there are unverified. Users targeting Vulkan-based applications should prefer the card with proven results.

In summary: choose the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 if you need compute performance, larger memory capacity, or proven Vulkan capability. Choose the AMD Radeon R9 M265X only if the system requires a PCIe 3.0 interface or if the card is already present and the workloads are modest. The benchmark data does not support any other conclusion.