NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER vs NVIDIA Quadro K2200 Comparison

The Verdict

The data separates these two NVIDIA cards into entirely different leagues. The GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the clear performance winner, with an average benchmark score of 12,986 across all recorded tests, while the Quadro K2200 sits at 10,761. That is a difference that shows up in every measurable workload. The GTX 1660 SUPER wins both head-to-head comparisons decisively, and it is the only one of the two that can reasonably handle modern gaming or compute tasks.

The Quadro K2200 is not without purpose. It is a single-slot, 68 W card with no power connectors, which makes it suitable for older workstations or systems with limited power delivery and physical space. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and Maxwell architecture keep it functional for basic display output and legacy professional applications, but benchmark results indicate it is outclassed by the GTX 1660 SUPER in raw compute and graphics throughput. The GTX 1660 SUPER delivers 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 1,438.7 GFLOPS for the Quadro, so any task that uses shader math will favor the newer card heavily.

Who should pick which: if you need a modern GPU with strong compute, 6 GB of GDDR6 memory, and the ability to run current APIs at their full feature level, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the only rational choice. If you have a legacy workstation with a 250 W power supply, no auxiliary power connector available, and only need basic 3D acceleration or multi-display output, the Quadro K2200 remains viable. The GTX 1660 SUPER also has a much higher percentile ranking at 53 compared to 49 for the Quadro, meaning it outperforms a larger share of the GPU population.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1660 SUPER wins everywhere that matters. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 52,490 against 11,431 for the Quadro K2200, a margin of 359.2%. In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin grows to 465.9%, with scores of 57,102 and 10,090 respectively. These are not close contests; the GTX 1660 SUPER is between 3.5 and 4.6 times faster in the two tests that were run on both cards.

The Quadro K2200 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its advantages are physical and practical, not performance-based. It consumes 68 W versus 125 W for the GTX 1660 SUPER, it occupies a single slot instead of two, and it does not require any power connector. For a system that cannot supply an 8-pin connector or accommodate a dual-slot card, the Quadro is the workable option despite its much lower scores. It also supports 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs alongside DVI, while the GTX 1660 SUPER provides one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and one DisplayPort 1.4a, so multi-monitor setups are possible on both.

The GTX 1660 SUPER also holds the edge in memory bandwidth at 336.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s, and in bus width at 192 bit versus 128 bit. Memory-heavy workloads such as texture streaming or large frame buffers will show a substantial difference. The Quadro's smaller 4 GB frame buffer may also limit scene complexity in professional 3D applications, whereas the 6 GB on the GTX 1660 SUPER provides more headroom.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses the TU116 chip built on Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K2200 uses the GM107 chip on Maxwell architecture, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It packs 1,870 million transistors into a 148 mm² die, for a density of 12.6 million per square millimeter.

The GTX 1660 SUPER has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The Quadro K2200 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This more than doubling of core resources explains the massive performance gap. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so both are pure rasterization and compute devices.

Clock speeds differ as well. The GTX 1660 SUPER runs at a base of 1530 MHz and boosts to 1785 MHz, while the Quadro K2200 operates at 1046 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. Higher clocks combined with more cores give the GTX 1660 SUPER a commanding lead in pixel rate, 85.68 GPixel/s versus 17.98 GPixel/s, and texture rate, 157.1 GTexel/s versus 44.96 GTexel/s.

Memory technology also separates them. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses GDDR6 running at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed, while the Quadro K2200 uses GDDR5 at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective speed. The FP16 capability of the GTX 1660 SUPER reaches 10.05 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro has no recorded FP16 support. API support differs too: the GTX 1660 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Quadro K2200 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The bus interface also differs. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Quadro K2200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. On older motherboards with limited PCIe bandwidth, this could matter for data transfer, though the compute gap dwarfs any interface difference.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER scores 52,490 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 359.2% higher than the Quadro K2200's 11,431. This is a massive margin that reflects the newer architecture, more shading units, and higher memory bandwidth.

Q: Can the Quadro K2200 run Vulkan applications?

A: Yes, it supports Vulkan 1.4, but its Geekbench Vulkan score of 10,090 is far below the GTX 1660 SUPER's 57,102. The GTX 1660 SUPER is 465.9% faster in this test.

Q: Which card is better for a small form factor or low-power system?

A: The Quadro K2200 is the better fit for constrained systems. It is single-slot, consumes 68 W, requires no power connector, and only needs a 250 W power supply. The GTX 1660 SUPER is dual-slot, draws 125 W, needs a 300 W power supply, and requires a 8-pin connector.

Q: Do these cards support modern graphics APIs?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. For DirectX, the GTX 1660 SUPER supports version 12 (12_1), while the Quadro K2200 is limited to 12 (11_0). The GTX 1660 SUPER also supports FP16 compute, which the Quadro does not.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro K2200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1660 SUPER has both more capacity and over four times the bandwidth.

Q: Is the Quadro K2200 comparable to any modern card in performance?

A: Its average benchmark score of 10,761 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10,690) and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10,629). It is slightly behind the AMD Radeon Pro 450 (10,804) and slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10,883 is the rival score, the Quadro trails it by 1.1%).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmark tests run on both cards were Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the GTX 1660 SUPER won both by enormous margins. In OpenCL, the GTX 1660 SUPER scored 52,490 versus 11,431 for the Quadro K2200. That is a delta of 359.2%, meaning the GTX 1660 SUPER is roughly 4.6 times faster in this workload. OpenCL is commonly used for general-purpose GPU compute, so this gap translates directly to faster physics simulations, image processing, and data-parallel tasks.

In Vulkan, the results are even more lopsided. The GTX 1660 SUPER scored 57,102, while the Quadro K2200 managed 10,090. The delta is 465.9%, putting the GTX 1660 SUPER at about 5.7 times the performance of the Quadro. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API used in modern games and professional applications, and this result confirms the GTX 1660 SUPER is far better equipped for current software.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the broader benchmark suite favors the GTX 1660 SUPER across the board. Its Passmark G3D score is 12,699, and its Passmark GPU compute score is 5,076. The Quadro K2200 has no recorded Passmark scores, so a direct comparison there is unavailable, but the Geekbench results alone are enough to establish the hierarchy. The GTX 1660 SUPER also reaches an average benchmark score of 12,986, which is close to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12,940) and the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928), while the Quadro K2200 sits near much older or lower-end parts.

The GTX 1660 SUPER's nearest rivals in the database include the Tesla M2090, which scores 13,075 and is 0.7% ahead, and the AMD Radeon 740M at 12,870, which is 0.9% behind. The Quadro K2200's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 450 at 10,804 (0.4% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti at 10,690 (0.7% behind). This positioning makes clear that the GTX 1660 SUPER competes in a much higher performance tier than the Quadro K2200.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification that affects performance. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses the TU116 chip with Turing architecture on a 12 nm process, while the Quadro K2200 uses the GM107 chip with Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm process. Transistor counts are 6,600 million versus 1,870 million, and die sizes are 284 mm² versus 148 mm². The GTX 1660 SUPER has a transistor density of 23.2 million per mm² compared to 12.6 million per mm² for the Quadro.

Clock speeds favor the GTX 1660 SUPER: 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost versus 1046 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1660 SUPER and 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the Quadro. The GTX 1660 SUPER has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth; the Quadro has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth.

Shader resources are dramatically different. The GTX 1660 SUPER has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the Quadro K2200 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rates are 85.68 GPixel/s versus 17.98 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 157.1 GTexel/s versus 44.96 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.027 TFLOPS for the GTX 1660 SUPER and 1,438.7 GFLOPS for the Quadro, with the GTX 1660 SUPER also offering FP16 at 10.05 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specifications diverge as well. The GTX 1660 SUPER has a TDP of 125 W, is dual-slot, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, and needs a 300 W power supply. The Quadro K2200 has a TDP of 68 W, is single-slot, requires no power connector, and needs only a 250 W power supply. The GTX 1660 SUPER is 229 mm long and 35 mm wide, while the Quadro K2200 is 202 mm long with no width recorded. Both are 111 mm high. The GTX 1660 SUPER uses PCIe 5.0 x16, the Quadro uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the GTX 1660 SUPER, and 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 for the Quadro. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) for the GTX 1660 SUPER and 12 (11_0) for the Quadro. The GTX 1660 SUPER launched on 2019-10-28 with a launch MSRP of 229 USD, while the Quadro K2200 launched on 2014-07-21 with no launch MSRP recorded.