AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile in every benchmark where both were measured. The Quadro P2200 wins both head-to-head tests, with the largest margin appearing in compute-oriented workloads.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 points against 7,435 points for the Vega 8 Mobile. That is a 335% advantage for the NVIDIA part. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap is even wider in percentage terms: the Quadro P2200 posts 31,351 points versus 6,970 points for the AMD integrated part, a 349.8% lead. These are not marginal wins; they represent a different performance class entirely.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The Quadro P2200 averages 8,686 across all recorded tests, while the Vega 8 Mobile averages 7,203. The delta between the two is roughly 20%, but that average includes several legacy DirectX tests where the Vega 8 Mobile was not measured, so the head-to-head comparison is the cleaner signal.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card helps contextualize these numbers. The Quadro P2200 sits at the 44th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with its closest neighbors being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (8,743 average, 0.7% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746 average, 0.7% lower), the AMD FirePro W5170M (8,595 average, 1.1% higher), and the Intel Arc A380 (8,558 average, 1.5% higher). So the Quadro P2200 is essentially neck-and-neck with those discrete parts, none of which are integrated graphics.

The Vega 8 Mobile, by contrast, sits at the 39th percentile, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 (7,222 average, 0.3% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE (7,171 average, 0.4% higher), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (7,170 average, 0.5% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (7,157 average, 0.6% higher). That last entry is curious: the GTX 970 is a much older high-end part, but its average score in this database is nearly identical to the Vega 8 Mobile, which suggests the integrated AMD part is competitive with a certain tier of older discrete GPUs.

The takeaway from the head-to-head data is unambiguous: the Quadro P2200 outperforms the Vega 8 Mobile by a factor of roughly 4.3 to 4.5 in the two tests that both cards can run. Even accounting for the fact that the Vega 8 Mobile is an integrated part with shared system memory, the margin is large enough that no workload in the database would flip the result.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families and different process nodes. The Quadro P2200 uses the GP106 chip on NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, built on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 4,400 million transistors on a die size of 200 mm², giving a transistor density of 22.0 million per mm². The Vega 8 Mobile uses the Raven-M chip on AMD's GCN 5.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. That chip packs 4,940 million transistors into 210 mm², for a density of 23.5 million per mm². So the AMD chip has both more transistors and a slightly higher density, but it is an integrated part with far fewer active graphics resources.

The execution resources tell the story. The Quadro P2200 has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 40 render output units. The Vega 8 Mobile has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. That is a 2.5x difference in shader count, a 2.5x difference in TMUs, and a 5x difference in ROPs. The ROP gap is particularly significant for fill-rate-bound workloads.

Clock speeds differ substantially as well. The Quadro P2200 runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz with a boost of 1493 MHz. The Vega 8 Mobile has a much lower base of 300 MHz but boosts to 1101 MHz. The boost behavior matters, but the Quadro's higher sustained clocks, combined with its larger execution array, produce the benchmark results seen above.

Memory is a fundamental differentiator. The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of dedicated GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 8 Mobile uses system shared memory, with its bandwidth described as "System Dependent" and its bus width as "System Shared." This means the Vega 8 Mobile's memory performance is entirely dependent on the host system's RAM configuration, which is a structural disadvantage for consistent performance.

The pixel and texture rates reflect the resource differences. The Quadro P2200 achieves 59.72 GPixel/s and 119.4 GTexel/s. The Vega 8 Mobile manages 8.808 GPixel/s and 35.23 GTexel/s. The Quadro's fill rates are roughly 6.8x higher for pixels and 3.4x higher for textures.

Compute throughput follows the same pattern. The Quadro P2200 delivers 3.822 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Vega 8 Mobile delivers 1,127.4 GFLOPS, which is about 1.13 TFLOPS. That is a 3.4x gap in single-precision compute. The FP16 picture is inverted in a sense: the Quadro P2200 manages only 59.72 GFLOPS at FP16, a 1:64 ratio versus FP32, while the Vega 8 Mobile hits 2.255 TFLOPS at FP16, a 2:1 ratio. This means the AMD part is far stronger in half-precision workloads relative to its own FP32, but its FP32 baseline is low enough that the Quadro's absolute FP16 deficit is irrelevant to the overall comparison.

Power consumption and form factor differ drastically. The Quadro P2200 is a 75 W single-slot card requiring no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Vega 8 Mobile is an IGP with a 25 W TDP, no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The Vega 8 Mobile also has no separate dimensions, as it is integrated into a portable device. Display outputs on the Quadro P2200 are 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Vega 8 Mobile's outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro P2200 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 8 Mobile supports Vulkan 1.3, a minor version difference. The Quadro's production status is end-of-life, as is the Vega 8 Mobile's. The Quadro was released in June 2019, the Vega 8 Mobile in January 2019.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 averages 8,686 points across all recorded tests, while the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile averages 7,203 points.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2200 leads by 335%. In Geekbench Vulkan, it leads by 349.8%.

Q: Does the Vega 8 Mobile have any advantage in compute workloads?

A: The Vega 8 Mobile has a much higher FP16 rate of 2.255 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio versus FP32, while the Quadro P2200 has a 1:64 ratio and only 59.72 GFLOPS at FP16. However, the Quadro's FP32 throughput of 3.822 TFLOPS is 3.4x higher than the Vega 8 Mobile's 1,127.4 GFLOPS.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of dedicated GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 8 Mobile uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 1,280 shading units, while the Vega 8 Mobile has 512. The Quadro also has 80 TMUs versus 32, and 40 ROPs versus 8.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The Quadro P2200's GP106 chip has 4,400 million transistors on 200 mm², a density of 22.0 million per mm². The Vega 8 Mobile's Raven-M chip has 4,940 million transistors on 210 mm², a density of 23.5 million per mm².

The Verdict

The data is not close. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 wins every head-to-head benchmark by a factor of at least 4.3x, and its average benchmark score is 20% higher than the Vega 8 Mobile's despite the Vega part being measured in fewer tests. The Quadro P2200's nearest rivals are all discrete GPUs, while the Vega 8 Mobile's nearest rivals include one integrated part (Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580) and several older discrete cards. The Quadro P2200 sits at the 44th percentile among all GPUs, the Vega 8 Mobile at the 39th, which is a smaller gap than the head-to-head numbers suggest but still favors NVIDIA.

Who should pick which? The Quadro P2200 is the clear choice for any workload that requires sustained compute, high fill rates, or dedicated memory bandwidth. Its 5 GB GDDR5X with 200.2 GB/s is a structural advantage over any system-shared memory solution. The Vega 8 Mobile is the only option for portable devices where a discrete card cannot physically fit, given its 25 W TDP and IGP form factor. But the performance cost is severe: roughly 77% lower FP32 compute, 6.8x lower pixel rate, and 3.4x lower texture rate.

The verdict is straightforward: if the system can accommodate a single-slot 75 W card, the Quadro P2200 is the superior part in every measured dimension. If the system must be an integrated portable device, the Vega 8 Mobile is the only viable choice, but it cannot match the Quadro's performance in any workload recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | 4,940 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 210 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 22.0M / mm² | 23.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1493 MHz | 1101 MHz |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5X | System Shared |

| Memory Bus | 160 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 200.2 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 512 |

| TMUs | 80 | 32 |

| ROPs | 40 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | 8.808 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 119.4 GTexel/s | 35.23 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.822 TFLOPS | 1,127.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) | 2.255 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Dimensions | 201 mm x 111 mm | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2019-06-09 | 2019-01-07 |

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P2200 wins in every benchmark category where both are measured. Its advantages are largest in compute-heavy tests: 335% in OpenCL and 349.8% in Vulkan. The Quadro's dedicated memory subsystem, with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth versus system-shared memory, gives it a structural edge in any workload that streams large datasets. Its 40 ROPs versus 8 ROPs means it wins decisively in fill-rate-bound scenarios, as confirmed by the 59.72 GPixel/s versus 8.808 GPixel/s pixel rates.

The Vega 8 Mobile wins in only one technical category: FP16 throughput. Its 2.255 TFLOPS at FP16 is far higher than the Quadro's 59.72 GFLOPS, and its 2:1 ratio versus FP32 is typical of GCN parts. But the database records no FP16 benchmark for either card, so this advantage has no measured performance outcome. The Vega 8 Mobile also wins on power efficiency in absolute terms, with a 25 W TDP versus 75 W, which is meaningful for battery-driven portable devices.

For use-case splits, the Quadro P2200 is the choice for workstation-class tasks: CAD, 3D rendering, video processing, or any professional workload that benefits from 5 GB of dedicated VRAM and a 160-bit bus. The Vega 8 Mobile is the choice for thin-and-light laptops where a discrete card is physically impossible, and where the workload is limited to light 2D graphics, video playback, or occasional compute that does not demand sustained throughput. The nearest-rival data reinforces this: the Quadro P2200 trades blows with discrete parts like the GTX 460 v2 and RTX 3050 A Mobile, while the Vega 8 Mobile matches older discrete cards like the GTX 750 and GTX 560 SE. That is the difference between a professional-class discrete GPU and an integrated part.