NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

The benchmark data places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 in the same performance percentile, yet their results could not be more different. Both cards sit at the 44th percentile among all GPUs, with the GTX 460 v2 averaging 8,743 points and the Quadro P2200 averaging 8,686 points. The average scores differ by less than 1%, but the head-to-head benchmark tells a far more dramatic story. In the single available comparison, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 points against the GTX 460 v2’s 8,743 points. That is a 73% lead for the Quadro, a gap that dwarfs the near-identical averages and reveals how misleading a single aggregate number can be.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, and it is a landslide. The Quadro P2200 delivers 32,344 points, while the GTX 460 v2 manages just 8,743 points. The deltaPct of -73% from the GTX 460 v2’s perspective underscores the magnitude of the defeat; the Quadro is roughly 3.7 times faster in this compute-oriented workload. This is not a marginal generational improvement — it is a complete overhaul of computational throughput.

However, the aggregate average scores tell a different story. The GTX 460 v2’s average benchmark score is 8,743, while the Quadro P2200’s is 8,686. The nearestRivals data confirms these are closely matched in overall standing. The GTX 460 v2’s closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8,746 points, a delta of 0%. The Quadro P2200 sits just 0.7% behind the GTX 460 v2 in the latter’s rival list. Conversely, from the Quadro’s perspective, the GTX 460 v2 is 0.7% ahead of it. The average scores are so close that they land within a rounding error of each other.

The discrepancy between the single head-to-head test and the aggregate averages is stark. The Geekbench OpenCL result shows a 73% advantage for the Quadro, yet the average scores are nearly identical. This suggests the GTX 460 v2’s average is buoyed by other workloads not captured in the head-to-head data, or that the OpenCL test is particularly favorable to the Pascal architecture. The data available does not include additional head-to-head tests, so the single result must carry the weight of the comparison. In that test, the Quadro P2200 is unequivocally superior.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Quadro P2200 wins the only direct comparison available. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 32,344 versus 8,743 is a decisive victory for the Pascal-based card. This indicates a significant advantage in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, which includes many scientific, engineering, and content-creation workloads.

The GTX 460 v2, despite losing the head-to-head, holds a marginal edge in the aggregate average score. Its 8,743 average edges out the Quadro P2200’s 8,686 by 0.7%. This could suggest that in other benchmarks not included in the head-to-head set, the older Fermi card performs relatively better. However, the data does not specify which tests contribute to the GTX 460 v2’s average beyond the single Geekbench OpenCL score. The Quadro P2200 has a broader benchmark suite, including multiple Passmark tests, but the GTX 460 v2’s average is derived from just one recorded result.

The Quadro P2200 also demonstrates versatility across its benchmark suite. Its Passmark G3D score is 9,364, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 3,921. These are standalone numbers, not compared directly to the GTX 460 v2, but they show the Quadro can handle both graphics and compute workloads. The GTX 460 v2 has no comparable data points, so its strengths beyond the single OpenCL test remain unquantified in this dataset.

For pure compute performance, the Quadro P2200 is the clear winner. For overall average standing, the two cards are effectively tied, with the GTX 460 v2 holding a 0.7% advantage that is statistically negligible.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by two full architecture generations. The GTX 460 v2 uses the GF114 chip based on Fermi 2.0, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro P2200 uses the GP106 chip based on Pascal, manufactured on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node shrink from 40 nm to 16 nm is the foundation of the performance gap.

The transistor counts reflect the architectural evolution. The GF114 packs 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The GP106 contains 4,400 million transistors on a smaller 200 mm² die, achieving a density of 22.0 million per square millimeter. The Quadro has more than double the transistor count in a smaller physical package, a direct result of the denser manufacturing process.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The GTX 460 v2 has 1,024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 96.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro has five times the capacity and more than double the bandwidth, despite a narrower bus, thanks to the faster GDDR5X memory running at 10 Gbps effective versus the GTX 460 v2’s 4 Gbps effective.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the Quadro. The GTX 460 v2 has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The Quadro P2200 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The Quadro has nearly four times the shading units and significantly more TMUs and ROPs. Pixel rate is 59.72 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 10.91 GPixel/s for the GTX 460 v2. Texture rate is 119.4 GTexel/s versus 43.62 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.822 TFLOPS for the Quadro versus 1,046.3 GFLOPS for the GTX 460 v2 — a 3.65x advantage.

The Quadro also introduces features the GTX 460 v2 lacks entirely. It supports FP16 at 59.72 GFLOPS, though at a 1:64 ratio, indicating limited half-precision throughput. The Quadro supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 460 v2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) with no Vulkan support listed. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

Physical and power characteristics are also divergent. The GTX 460 v2 is a dual-slot card requiring 2x 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W PSU, with a TDP of 160 W. The Quadro P2200 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a 250 W PSU recommendation, and a 75 W TDP. The Quadro is shorter at 201 mm versus 210 mm, and it offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus the GTX 460 v2’s 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a.

The GTX 460 v2 was released on September 23, 2011, with a launch MSRP of 199 USD. The Quadro P2200 was released on June 9, 2019, with no launch MSRP provided. The GTX 460 v2 belongs to the GeForce 400 generation, succeeding GeForce 200 and preceding GeForce 500. The Quadro P2200 is part of the Quadro Pascal generation, succeeding Quadro Maxwell and preceding Quadro Volta.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous in the head-to-head test: the Quadro P2200 dominates the GTX 460 v2 in OpenCL compute performance by 73%. The Quadro’s architectural advantages — newer process node, more transistors, faster memory, and nearly four times the shading units — translate directly into a massive compute lead. For any workload that leverages OpenCL, the Quadro P2200 is the only rational choice from this comparison.

The aggregate average scores complicate the narrative slightly. The GTX 460 v2 holds a 0.7% edge in average benchmark score, but this is derived from a single test result. The Quadro P2200’s average is based on nine benchmarks, including multiple Passmark tests across different DirectX versions and compute workloads. The GTX 460 v2’s single score is not a robust basis for claiming overall superiority.

The Quadro P2200 also offers practical advantages beyond raw performance. It consumes 75 W versus 160 W, requires no external power connectors, occupies a single slot, and supports modern APIs like Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12_1. The GTX 460 v2 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and lacks Vulkan support. The Quadro’s 5 GB of memory is a fivefold increase over the GTX 460 v2’s 1 GB, which is critical for modern workloads.

For a user choosing between these two cards today, the Quadro P2200 is the superior choice in every measurable category except the trivial 0.7% aggregate average difference. The GTX 460 v2’s only claim is its lower launch MSRP of 199 USD, but that is a historical figure from 2011 and does not reflect current availability or performance. The Quadro P2200 wins the compute benchmark, offers more memory, better API support, lower power draw, and a smaller physical footprint. The verdict is clear: the Quadro P2200 is the better GPU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 scores 8,743 points, giving the Quadro a 73% advantage.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 460 v2 has an average benchmark score of 8,743, and the Quadro P2200 has an average of 8,686. The GTX 460 v2 is 0.7% ahead in this aggregate metric.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The GTX 460 v2 has 1,024 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 96.19 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 1,280 shading units, while the GTX 460 v2 has 336. The Quadro also has 80 TMUs and 40 ROPs versus the GTX 460 v2’s 56 TMUs and 24 ROPs.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 460 v2 has a TDP of 160 W and requires 2x 6-pin power connectors. The Quadro P2200 has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W versus 450 W.

Q: Which card supports more modern APIs?

A: The Quadro P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 460 v2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed.