NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750. In the two head-to-head benchmark comparisons available, the Quadro P2200 wins both outright, and the margins are substantial.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P2200 scores 32,344, while the GTX 750 scores 9,315. That is a 247.2% advantage for the Quadro, meaning it delivers roughly three and a half times the compute throughput in this workload. This is not a close race; it is a generational and architectural stomping.

The Geekbench Vulkan result is even more lopsided. The Quadro P2200 posts 31,351, against 8,078 for the GTX 750, a 288.1% lead. Vulkan is a low-level API that tends to expose raw hardware capabilities, and the data indicates the Pascal-based card simply has far more resources to throw at the workload.

Looking at the broader database averages, the Quadro P2200 has an average benchmark score of 8,686, while the GTX 750 sits at 7,222. The gap in average score is about 20% in favor of the Quadro, but the head-to-head tests show far larger deltas, which suggests the GTX 750 performs relatively better in some older or lighter tests that are not part of the direct comparison set.

The percentile standings tell a similar story. The Quadro P2200 ranks in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 750 ranks in the 40th percentile. Neither card is a top-tier performer by modern standards, but the Quadro sits consistently above the GTX 750.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P2200 wins every head-to-head comparison in the database. There are no benchmark categories where the GTX 750 takes a victory. The wins tally is 2 for the Quadro, 0 for the GTX 750.

That said, the GTX 750 does have one unique benchmark result that the Quadro does not share: a Geekbench Metal score of 4,274. This is not a direct comparison, since the Quadro has no Metal result recorded, but it shows the GTX 750 can run Metal workloads on platforms that support it. The Quadro P2200, by contrast, has no Metal entry, so users needing that specific API on a Mac or other Metal-compatible system would find the GTX 750 has at least one usable path.

The Quadro P2200 wins in compute-heavy OpenCL and Vulkan tasks by a wide margin. Its Passmark scores further reinforce this: it records 9,364 in G3D, 3,921 in GPU compute, 881 in G2D, and strong legacy DirectX numbers including 167 in DirectX 9, 70 in DirectX 11, 45 in DirectX 10, and 33 in DirectX 12. The GTX 750 has no Passmark entries in the database, so those workloads cannot be compared directly, but the head-to-head results already establish the Quadro as the clear compute winner.

For use-case planning, the Quadro P2200 is the obvious choice for OpenCL and Vulkan compute tasks, CAD-style workloads, and any application that leans on general-purpose GPU compute. The GTX 750 is a much older, lower-end card that offers no recorded wins in any shared test, so its only niche is legacy systems or Metal-specific environments where the Quadro has no presence.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and different manufacturing nodes. The Quadro P2200 uses the GP106 chip built on Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 750 uses the GM107 chip on Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The node shrink from 28 nm to 16 nm is a major factor in the performance and efficiency gap.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The Quadro P2200 packs 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 22.0 million per mm². The GTX 750 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, with a density of 12.6 million per mm². The Quadro has more than double the transistor count and a significantly higher density, which explains its ability to deliver far more compute throughput.

Memory configurations are also very different. The Quadro P2200 comes with 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 750 has only 1 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro has more than twice the memory bandwidth and five times the memory capacity, which is critical for modern workloads and larger data sets.

The compute resources are heavily skewed toward the Quadro. It has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 40 render output units. The GTX 750 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Quadro has 2.5 times the shading units, 2.5 times the TMUs, and 2.5 times the ROPs.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The GTX 750 has a slightly higher base clock at 1,020 MHz versus 1,000 MHz for the Quadro, but the Quadro has a much higher boost clock at 1,493 MHz versus 1,085 MHz. The memory clock is similar in raw MHz, 1,251 MHz for the Quadro and 1,253 MHz for the GTX 750, but the Quadro's GDDR5X memory runs at 10 Gbps effective, while the GTX 750's GDDR5 runs at 5 Gbps effective.

Pixel and texture rates follow the resource counts. The Quadro P2200 achieves 59.72 GPixel/s and 119.4 GTexel/s, while the GTX 750 manages 17.36 GPixel/s and 34.72 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is also far apart: the Quadro delivers 3.822 TFLOPS of FP32, while the GTX 750 delivers 1,111 GFLOPS (about 1.11 TFLOPS). The Quadro also has a recorded FP16 rate of 59.72 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, while the GTX 750 has no FP16 data.

The API support differs in DirectX level. The Quadro supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 750 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Power and physical characteristics also differ. The Quadro P2200 has a TDP of 75 W, while the GTX 750 is rated at 55 W. Both are single-slot cards with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Quadro is longer at 201 mm (7.9 inches) versus 145 mm (5.7 inches) for the GTX 750. The Quadro is 111 mm tall (4.4 inches); the GTX 750 has no recorded height. Display outputs differ as well: the Quadro has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the GTX 750 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 247.2% higher than the GTX 750's 9,315.

Q: Does the GTX 750 win any benchmark against the Quadro P2200?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the Quadro P2200 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The GTX 750 has no recorded wins.

Q: Why does the GTX 750 have a Metal benchmark but the Quadro does not?

A: The database lists a Geekbench Metal score of 4,274 for the GTX 750, while no Metal result is recorded for the Quadro P2200. This is a platform-specific API measurement, not a direct comparison.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Quadro P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X, while the GTX 750 has 1 GB of GDDR5.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Quadro P2200 has a TDP of 75 W, and the GTX 750 has a TDP of 55 W. Both use no external power connectors and recommend a 250 W PSU.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The Quadro P2200 scores 31,351 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 288.1% higher than the GTX 750's 8,078.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 22.0M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1020 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1493 MHz | 1085 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1251 MHz, 10 Gbps effective | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 160 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 200.2 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 512 |

| TMUs | 80 | 32 |

| ROPs | 40 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | 17.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 119.4 GTexel/s | 34.72 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.822 TFLOPS | 1,111.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 75 W | 55 W |

| Length | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | Not recorded |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Release Date | 2019-06-09 | 2014-02-17 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Maxwell | GeForce 600 |

| Successor | Quadro Volta | GeForce 900 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 119 USD |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 in every shared benchmark, with deltas of 247.2% in OpenCL and 288.1% in Vulkan. The average benchmark score favors the Quadro at 8,686 versus 7,222, and the percentile ranking is higher at 44 versus 40.

Anyone choosing between these two cards for compute, OpenCL, or Vulkan workloads should pick the Quadro P2200 without hesitation. It has 2.5 times the shading units, 2.5 times the TMUs, 2.5 times the ROPs, more than double the transistor count, five times the memory capacity, and 2.5 times the memory bandwidth. The architectural advantage from Pascal over Maxwell, plus the 16 nm node versus 28 nm, makes the Quadro the only reasonable choice for modern workloads.

The GTX 750 has one niche: it is the only one of the two with a recorded Metal benchmark score (4,274). If a system requires Metal support and the Quadro's lack of a Metal result is a blocker, the GTX 750 is the only option with recorded data. It is also a lower-TDP card at 55 W versus 75 W, and it is shorter at 145 mm versus 201 mm, which could matter in very compact cases. Its launch MSRP was 119 USD, and it was released in 2014, while the Quadro arrived in 2019.

For essentially any other purpose, the Quadro P2200 is the superior card. The performance gap is so large that the GTX 750 cannot be recommended as a general-purpose or compute GPU in any comparison where the Quadro is available. The GTX 750 belongs in legacy systems or Metal-specific setups; the Quadro P2200 belongs everywhere else.