AMD Radeon Vega 8 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Vega 8 and NVIDIA Quadro P2200 represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing: one is an integrated processor unit (IGP) built into a laptop or desktop APU, while the other is a dedicated workstation card. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the Quadro P2200 winning both head-to-head tests by a substantial margin, yet the Vega 8 holds its own in specific architectural contexts. The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story than the raw head-to-head results, with the Vega 8 averaging 9221 points against the Quadro P2200’s 8686, though this discrepancy is explained by the different test suites each card was subjected to.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share only two common benchmark tests in the data: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In OpenCL, the Quadro P2200 scores 32344 against the Vega 8’s 8822, a delta of -72.7% for the AMD part. This is not a close contest; the NVIDIA card delivers roughly 3.7 times the raw compute throughput in this API. The Vulkan test shows a similar pattern, with the Quadro P2200 hitting 31351 versus 8134 for the Vega 8, a -74.1% delta. These results place the Quadro P2200 firmly in a different performance class for general-purpose GPU compute.

However, the average benchmark scores across all available tests paint a more nuanced picture. The Vega 8’s average of 9221 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon 890M and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960, while the Quadro P2200’s 8686 average puts it 0.7% behind the GTX 460 v2 and 1.5% ahead of the Intel Arc A380. This suggests that in the broader benchmark landscape, the Vega 8’s limited test set (only three Geekbench entries) may be inflating its average relative to the Quadro P2200, which has nine recorded benchmarks including several Passmark tests. The Quadro P2200’s Passmark G3D score of 9364 and GPU compute score of 3921 indicate strong DirectX and compute performance, while its DirectX 9 score of 167 and DirectX 10 score of 45 show legacy API weaknesses.

The percentiles reinforce this divide: the Vega 8 sits at the 45th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P2200 ranks at the 44th percentile. Despite the Quadro’s dominance in the two shared tests, its overall standing is essentially tied with the Vega 8 when considering all GPUs, largely because the Vega 8’s higher average comes from a narrower, more favorable test selection.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is generational and philosophical. The Vega 8 uses AMD’s GCN 5.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, built around the Raven chip with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. It integrates 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. The Quadro P2200, by contrast, employs NVIDIA’s Pascal architecture on a 16 nm TSMC process, using the GP106 chip with 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. It packs 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 40 ROPs, running at a 1000 MHz base and 1493 MHz boost.

The memory subsystem is where the differences become stark. The Vega 8 has no dedicated VRAM; it uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, which ties its performance directly to the host system’s RAM speed and configuration. The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 10 Gbps. This dedicated memory gives the Quadro a massive advantage in bandwidth-bound workloads, as the Vega 8’s system-shared memory cannot match the raw throughput of discrete GDDR5X.

Compute rates follow the hardware counts. The Quadro P2200’s pixel rate is 59.72 GPixel/s versus the Vega 8’s 8.800 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 119.4 GTexel/s versus 35.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.822 TFLOPS for the Quadro against 1,126.4 GFLOPS for the Vega 8. Interestingly, the Vega 8 has a massive FP16 advantage at 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the Quadro P2200 is crippled at 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), reflecting Pascal’s historically weak FP16 support. Power envelopes differ accordingly: the Vega 8 draws only 25 W as an IGP, while the Quadro P2200 is rated at 75 W with a suggested 250 W power supply.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Quadro P2200 wins decisively in FP32, delivering 3.822 TFLOPS versus the Vega 8’s 1,126.4 GFLOPS, and also leads in pixel rate (59.72 GPixel/s vs 8.800 GPixel/s) and texture rate (119.4 GTexel/s vs 35.20 GTexel/s).

Q: Does the Vega 8 have any architectural advantage?

A: Yes, the Vega 8 supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, achieving 2.253 TFLOPS, whereas the Quadro P2200’s FP16 is limited to 1:64, yielding only 59.72 GFLOPS. This could benefit workloads using half-precision arithmetic.

Q: How do the memory configurations affect performance?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega 8 relies on system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. This means the Vega 8’s performance scales with the host system’s RAM, while the Quadro has fixed, dedicated bandwidth.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The Vega 8 is an IGP with no slot width, power connectors, or bus interface beyond the motherboard, and its display outputs are motherboard-dependent. The Quadro P2200 is a single-slot card measuring 201 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The Vega 8 was released on 2018-02-11 and succeeded the GCN 3.0 IGP, with the Vega II IGP as its successor. The Quadro P2200 was released on 2019-06-09, succeeding Quadro Maxwell and followed by Quadro Volta.

Q: How do the percentile rankings compare?

A: The Vega 8 ranks at the 45th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P2200 ranks at the 44th percentile, indicating they occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance distribution despite the Quadro’s dominance in direct comparison.

Specification Differences

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

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |

| Chip | Raven | GP106 |

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Pascal |

| Generation | Vega IGP (Raven Ridge) | Quadro Pascal (Px200) |

| Process node | 14 nm | 16 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

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

| Die size | 210 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor density | 23.5M / mm² | 22.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 300 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1100 MHz | 1493 MHz |

| Memory size | System Shared | 5 GB |

| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR5X |

| Memory bus width | System Shared | 160 bit |

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

| Shading units | 512 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 32 | 80 |

| ROPs | 8 | 40 |

| Pixel rate | 8.800 GPixel/s | 59.72 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 35.20 GTexel/s | 119.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,126.4 GFLOPS | 3.822 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1) | 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 25 W | 75 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Bus interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan version | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | N/A | 201 mm x 111 mm |

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P2200 wins every head-to-head benchmark and dominates in raw throughput metrics. Its 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 40 ROPs, combined with a 1493 MHz boost clock and 200.2 GB/s of dedicated GDDR5X bandwidth, make it the clear choice for compute-heavy professional workloads, CAD applications, and any scenario requiring sustained GPU performance without reliance on system memory. The 3.822 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 59.72 GPixel/s pixel rate are roughly 3.4x and 6.8x the Vega 8’s respective figures, respectively, positioning the Quadro as a capable workstation accelerator for rendering, simulation, and video processing tasks. Its four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also support multi-monitor professional setups, whereas the Vega 8’s outputs depend entirely on the motherboard implementation.

The Vega 8’s wins are more situational. Its 25 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for low-power systems where a discrete GPU is impractical, and its system-shared memory means it can leverage the host’s RAM capacity without a fixed VRAM limit. The FP16 advantage at 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1) versus the Quadro’s 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) is significant for machine learning inference or other half-precision workloads, though this is a narrow niche. The Vega 8’s 45th percentile ranking, essentially tied with the Quadro’s 44th, suggests that in the broader GPU landscape, neither card is a standout, but the Vega 8 achieves this parity with a fraction of the power draw. For gaming or light creative work on an APU-based system, the Vega 8’s 8 ROPs and 35.20 GTexel/s texture rate are adequate, but the Quadro P2200’s 59.72 GPixel/s and 119.4 GTexel/s are in a different league for pixel-heavy and texture-bound applications. Ultimately, the Quadro P2200 is the clear performance winner, while the Vega 8 wins on power efficiency, integration simplicity, and FP16 capability.