NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX represent two very different eras of GPU design, with the data showing a decisive generational leap. The Quadro P2200, built on the Pascal architecture, is a professional workstation card from 2019, while the GTX 675MX is a Kepler-based mobile part from 2012. The benchmark results, though limited, paint a clear picture of performance disparity, with the P2200 dominating the only shared test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole common benchmark between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL compute test, and the results are stark. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX manages only 10,723 points. This translates to a 201.6% advantage for the Quadro P2200, meaning it delivers more than three times the compute performance of the older mobile chip. This is not a marginal win; it is a complete rout.

This massive delta is the single most important data point in this comparison. It highlights not just a difference in raw capability but also the profound impact of architectural evolution and process technology improvements. The Quadro P2200’s 3.822 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power eclipses the GTX 675MX’s 1,255.7 GFLOPS, a mathematical confirmation of the benchmark result.

Looking at their overall standing, the Quadro P2200 holds an average benchmark score of 8,686, placing it in the 44th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, scores 8,743, a negligible 0.7% difference. The GTX 675MX, in contrast, has an average score of 8,427, putting it in the 43rd percentile. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon 880M, is virtually tied at 8,436, just 0.1% behind. While their percentile rankings are adjacent, the P2200’s higher average score suggests a slight but consistent edge in overall performance across multiple workloads.

The data reveals a clear hierarchy, but it also hints at the different purposes of these cards. The Quadro P2200’s impressive OpenCL score suggests it is built for compute-heavy professional tasks, while the GTX 675MX, with its limited benchmark data, was likely more focused on gaming performance in its time. The 201.6% delta in the head-to-head test is the definitive answer to any performance question, leaving no room for ambiguity about which GPU is faster.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is significantly faster in compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is dramatically faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 32,344 compared to the GTX 675MX’s 10,723, a 201.6% improvement.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Quadro P2200 has a higher average benchmark score of 8,686, while the GTX 675MX averages 8,427. This places them in the 44th and 43rd percentiles of all GPUs, respectively.

Q: What are the closest competitors for each card based on average score?

A: The Quadro P2200’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2, which scores 8,743, a 0.7% difference. For the GTX 675MX, the AMD Radeon 880M is the closest, scoring 8,436, a 0.1% difference.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Quadro P2200 has a significantly higher pixel rate of 59.72 GPixel/s, compared to the GTX 675MX’s 13.08 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro P2200 offers 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the GTX 675MX provides 115.2 GB/s. The P2200 also has more memory at 5 GB compared to 2 GB.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The Quadro P2200 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 675MX supports Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support DirectX 12, but the P2200 supports version 12_1, while the GTX 675MX supports 11_0.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural divide between these two GPUs is the primary driver of their performance gap. The Quadro P2200 is built on the Pascal architecture, using a 16 nm process node at TSMC. In contrast, the GTX 675MX uses the older Kepler architecture and a larger 28 nm process. This process shrink allows the P2200 to pack 4,400 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 22.0M / mm². The GTX 675MX, despite having a larger 294 mm² die, contains fewer transistors at 3,540 million, yielding a lower density of 12.0M / mm².

These architectural and manufacturing differences translate directly into contrasting hardware capabilities. The Quadro P2200 is equipped with 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 40 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). The GTX 675MX, on the other hand, has 960 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The P2200’s higher count of both shading units and ROPs contributes to its superior pixel rate of 59.72 GPixel/s, versus 13.08 GPixel/s for the older card.

The memory subsystems also reflect their different generations and purposes. The Quadro P2200 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, achieving a bandwidth of 200.2 GB/s. The GTX 675MX uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a wider 256-bit bus, but its lower memory clock results in a bandwidth of only 115.2 GB/s. The P2200’s memory type and higher effective speed of 10 Gbps, compared to 3.6 Gbps on the GTX 675MX, give it a decisive advantage in data throughput. The P2200 also supports a newer Vulkan API version (1.4 vs 1.2.175) and a more advanced DirectX 12 feature level (12_1 vs 11_0).

Specification Differences

A direct comparison of their core specifications reveals the scale of the technological leap. The most obvious difference is in their process nodes: the Quadro P2200 uses a 16 nm process, while the GTX 675MX uses a 28 nm process. This is reflected in their transistor counts and die sizes, with the P2200 having more transistors in a smaller package.

Clock speeds are a key differentiator. The Quadro P2200 has a defined base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1493 MHz, while the GTX 675MX has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 900 MHz. The P2200’s memory runs at 1251 MHz, translating to 10 Gbps effective, while the GTX 675MX’s memory runs at 900 MHz, or 3.6 Gbps effective.

The memory configuration is a significant point of divergence. The Quadro P2200 offers 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus, while the GTX 675MX offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. This results in a bandwidth of 200.2 GB/s for the P2200 versus 115.2 GB/s for the GTX 675MX. The rendering capabilities are also starkly different, with the P2200 achieving a pixel rate of 59.72 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 119.4 GTexel/s, compared to 13.08 GPixel/s and 52.32 GTexel/s for the GTX 675MX. The P2200’s FP32 performance is listed as 3.822 TFLOPS, while the GTX 675MX is rated at 1,255.7 GFLOPS.

Their physical and power characteristics are also distinct. The Quadro P2200 is a single-slot card with a TDP of 75 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, requiring no power connectors. The GTX 675MX is an MXM module with a higher TDP of 100 W. The P2200 features 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the GTX 675MX has outputs that are "Portable Device Dependent." The P2200 connects via PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas the GTX 675MX uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the NVIDIA Quadro P2200. Its 201.6% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test is a categorical statement of superiority in compute workloads. The P2200’s higher average benchmark score of 8,686, compared to 8,427 for the GTX 675MX, reinforces this conclusion. For any application that leverages GPU compute, the P2200 is the only rational choice.

The GTX 675MX, while a capable part for its time, is outclassed in every measurable way. Its lower shading unit count, reduced ROPs, smaller memory capacity, and significantly lower bandwidth put it at a fundamental disadvantage. The architectural advancements of Pascal over Kepler, combined with the efficiency of the 16 nm process, create an insurmountable gap. This is not a close contest; it is a demonstration of how far GPU technology advanced in the seven years between their release dates.

From a pure performance standpoint, the Quadro P2200 is the definitive winner. The GTX 675MX’s only potential advantage lies in its historical context as a mobile gaming GPU, but even that is not supported by the benchmark data available. The P2200’s professional pedigree, indicated by its DisplayPort outputs and compute-focused architecture, makes it the clear choice for workstation tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 wins in every category where data exists. Its primary win is in compute performance, as demonstrated by the Geekbench OpenCL score, where it is 201.6% faster. This suggests it is suited for professional applications like 3D rendering, scientific simulation, and video encoding. Its higher pixel rate of 59.72 GPixel/s and texture rate of 119.4 GTexel/s also make it a stronger candidate for high-resolution display output and complex scene rendering.

The Quadro P2200 also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 5 GB of GDDR5X and 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth, it can handle larger datasets and more complex textures than the GTX 675MX’s 2 GB of GDDR5 at 115.2 GB/s. Its support for four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs positions it for multi-monitor professional setups, a feature the GTX 675MX lacks entirely.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX has no benchmark wins in this data set. Its only potential advantages are its lower transistor count and larger die size, which are not performance benefits. The GTX 675MX could theoretically be considered for legacy systems requiring an MXM module, but its performance is so far behind that it offers no competitive use case based on the available information. Its lower average score and percentile ranking confirm it as a less capable part across the board.