AMD Radeon RX 580 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data leaves no ambiguity: the AMD Radeon RX 580 dominates the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 in every recorded head-to-head test. In the two shared workloads, the RX 580 delivers a crushing 227.6% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and a 347.7% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. These are not marginal gaps; they represent entirely different performance tiers.

Looking at the raw numbers, the RX 580 scores 37,453 in Geekbench OpenCL against the K2200's 11,431. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 580 posts 45,173 while the K2200 manages only 10,090. The Vulkan gap is particularly striking, with the RX 580 more than quadrupling the K2200's output. Even the smaller of the two deltas, the OpenCL result, still shows the RX 580 at roughly 3.3 times the K2200's score.

The overall average benchmark score tells the same story. The RX 580 averages 12,928 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The K2200 averages 10,761, sitting in the 49th percentile. The 2,167-point gap in average score is substantial, but it understates the head-to-head disparity because the two cards share only two benchmark tests. When directly compared on identical workloads, the RX 580's margin is far wider than the average scores suggest.

The nearest rival data contextualizes these results further. The RX 580's closest competitor by average score is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, which trails by just 0.1%, followed by the GTX 1660 SUPER at 0.4% behind. Meanwhile, the K2200's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 450, which sits 0.4% above it. This means the RX 580 is competing with modern mobile GPUs, while the K2200 is bracketed by much older or lower-tier hardware. The performance stratification is clear.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 580 wins in every scenario where both cards have recorded data. It takes both the OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, giving it a 2-0 record in direct comparisons. The K2200 has zero wins in shared tests. This is not a balanced matchup with trade-offs; it is a one-sided result.

For compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL, such as rendering, simulation, or general GPU compute, the RX 580's 227.6% lead means it will finish work in roughly a third of the time. For Vulkan-based workloads, which increasingly appear in modern graphics applications and some professional visualization tools, the RX 580's 347.7% advantage is even more pronounced. Anyone choosing between these two cards for Vulkan compute should expect the RX 580 to be the only viable option.

The K2200 does have strengths, but they are not visible in the benchmark data. It is a single-slot card with no external power connectors, drawing only 68 W compared to the RX 580's 185 W. It also uses PCIe 2.0 x16, which is an older interface. These factors make the K2200 easier to fit into constrained systems, but they do not translate into any performance wins in the recorded tests. In terms of raw output, the RX 580 is the clear choice for every workload measured.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580 scores 37,453 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 227.6% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2200's 11,431.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The RX 580 scores 45,173 in Geekbench Vulkan compared to the K2200's 10,090, a 347.7% difference in favor of the RX 580.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The RX 580 has an average benchmark score of 12,928 across all recorded tests, while the K2200 averages 10,761.

Q: How does each card rank against all other GPUs?

A: The RX 580 sits in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, while the K2200 sits in the 49th percentile.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RX 580 has 2,304 shading units, whereas the K2200 has 640 shading units.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card by average score?

A: The RX 580's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile at 0.1% behind. The K2200's closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 450, which is 0.4% ahead of it.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The RX 580 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The K2200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing only 80.19 GB/s. That is a threefold difference in memory bandwidth, which directly impacts texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads.

Clock speeds also favor the RX 580. It runs at a base clock of 1257 MHz with a boost of 1340 MHz, while the K2200 operates at 1046 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. The memory clock shows a similar pattern: the RX 580 runs at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), while the K2200 runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

The compute resources are heavily skewed as well. The RX 580 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The K2200 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate and texture rate follow accordingly: the RX 580 achieves 42.88 GPixel/s and 193.0 GTexel/s, while the K2200 manages 17.98 GPixel/s and 44.96 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows the RX 580 at 6.175 TFLOPS FP32, versus the K2200's 1,438.7 GFLOPS (approximately 1.44 TFLOPS).

Power and physical requirements diverge sharply. The RX 580 has a 185 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, uses a 1x 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The K2200 has a 68 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The RX 580 measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length, while the K2200 measures 202 mm (8 inches) with a height of 111 mm (4.4 inches). The RX 580 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the K2200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Display outputs also differ: the RX 580 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the K2200 provides 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The RX 580 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The K2200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 580 launched with an MSRP of 229 USD; no launch MSRP is recorded for the K2200.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The RX 580 is built on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture using the Polaris 20 chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The K2200 uses NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node advantage is significant: 14 nm versus 28 nm allows the RX 580 to pack 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per mm². The K2200 contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, with a density of 12.6 million per mm².

The RX 580 belongs to the Polaris (RX 500) generation, succeeding the Arctic Islands architecture and preceding Vega. The K2200 is part of the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation, succeeding Quadro Fermi and preceding Quadro Maxwell. Notably, the K2200's generation name references Kepler, though its chip is Maxwell-based, which reflects the naming overlap in NVIDIA's professional lineup at the time.

Neither card has dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The RX 580 offers FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it can process half-precision at the same rate as full-precision. The K2200 has no recorded FP16 capability. The RX 580's memory subsystem is far more robust, with double the capacity, double the bus width, and more than triple the bandwidth. The K2200's smaller memory footprint and narrower bus will limit its effectiveness in large datasets, a common requirement in professional visualization.

The RX 580 was released on 2017-04-17, while the K2200 was released on 2014-07-21. Both are end-of-life products, but the RX 580 is three years newer, which explains its architectural advantages. The RX 580 also supports a newer DirectX feature level (12_0 versus 11_0), which matters for compatibility with modern graphics APIs.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 580 is the superior card in every measured metric. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average score, sits in a higher percentile, and offers dramatically better specifications across the board. For anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the RX 580 is the only rational choice. The 227.6% OpenCL lead and 347.7% Vulkan lead are decisive, not incremental.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 is not without merit, but its merits are not performance-related. It draws only 68 W, requires no power connectors, fits in a single slot, and measures 202 mm in length. These traits make it suitable for compact workstations or systems with tight power budgets. However, the benchmark data shows that the K2200's nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 560 Ti and the Radeon RX 6600S, both of which are older or lower-tier products. The K2200 is positioned for legacy compatibility or power-constrained environments, not for raw throughput.

The RX 580's nearest rivals are the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and GTX 1660 SUPER, which are far more modern and capable. This places the RX 580 in a different performance class entirely. Its 8 GB memory capacity, 256-bit bus, and 6.175 TFLOPS FP32 performance are sufficient for contemporary workloads, while the K2200's 4 GB capacity and 1.44 TFLOPS FP32 output are increasingly inadequate.

Choose the RX 580 if you need compute performance, modern API support, or high memory bandwidth. Choose the K2200 only if physical constraints, power limits, or slot compatibility are absolute requirements and you do not need the performance headroom. The recorded data does not support any other conclusion.