NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a remarkably one-sided picture between these two NVIDIA offerings. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 claims the only head-to-head benchmark victory, decisively winning the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 32,344 against the GTX 880M's 5,622. That translates to a 475.3% advantage — a staggering margin that underscores fundamental generational differences.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the Quadro P2200 shows strength across multiple compute and graphics workloads. Its Passmark G3D score of 9,364 and Passmark GPU Compute score of 3,921 indicate robust general-purpose rendering and compute capability. The GTX 880M, by contrast, has only two recorded benchmarks in the FACT PACK: its Geekbench OpenCL score and a Geekbench Metal score of 10,458. While that Metal result suggests some platform-specific competence, the absence of comparable DirectX or OpenGL benchmarks for the 880M makes direct cross-comparison impossible for those workloads.

The Quadro P2200's average benchmark score of 8,686 places it in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 880M's average of 8,040 sits at the 42nd percentile. These percentile rankings indicate both cards occupy similar mid-pack territory overall, but the P2200's advantage in the one directly comparable test reveals where the real performance gap lies: compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is vast, rooted in a five-year gap in design philosophy. The Quadro P2200 is built on the Pascal architecture using the GP106 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 16 nm process. It packs 4,400 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 22.0 million per mm². The GTX 880M, meanwhile, relies on the older Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process. It contains 3,540 million transistors spread across a larger 294 mm² die, yielding a density of just 12.0 million per mm² — a clear illustration of how process node improvements enable greater packing efficiency.

Memory configurations further differentiate the two. The Quadro P2200 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 880M counters with 8 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, but its slower 5 Gbps effective memory speed caps bandwidth at 160.0 GB/s. The P2200 thus achieves higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus, thanks to the faster memory technology.

Compute resource allocation differs meaningfully. The Quadro P2200 fields 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 40 ROPs. The GTX 880M has more shading units (1,536) and TMUs (128) but fewer ROPs (32). This suggests the Kepler chip was designed for higher geometric throughput, while Pascal's architecture emphasizes efficiency per shader. The P2200's fp32 performance of 3.822 TFLOPS exceeds the 880M's 3.050 TFLOPS, and the P2200 also supports fp16 (at a 1:64 ratio) whereas the 880M has no fp16 capability listed.

Power and form factor differences are stark. The Quadro P2200 draws 75 W TDP in a single-slot design with no power connectors, compatible with a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX 880M consumes 122 W as an MXM module, reflecting its laptop-oriented design. API support also diverges: the P2200 offers DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the 880M tops out at DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single available head-to-head comparison is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is not close. The Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 versus the GTX 880M's 5,622, a 475.3% delta in favor of the Pascal card. This result likely reflects multiple compounding advantages: the P2200's higher fp32 throughput (3.822 vs 3.050 TFLOPS), its substantially higher memory bandwidth (200.2 vs 160.0 GB/s), and its newer architecture's better compute efficiency per clock.

Contextualizing via nearest rivals provides additional perspective. The P2200's nearest rivals by average score include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (8,743, -0.7% delta) and the AMD FirePro W5170M (8,595, +1.1% delta). The GTX 880M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8,039, 0% delta) and the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8,053, -0.2% delta). These comparisons suggest that while the P2200 outperforms the 880M in raw compute, both cards sit in similar performance tiers relative to their contemporary peers — the P2200 against mid-range desktop parts, the 880M against older mobile-oriented hardware.

The Passmark results for the P2200 paint a nuanced picture: strong G3D (9,364) and G2D (881) scores, but modest DirectX-specific results (45 in DX10, 70 in DX11, 33 in DX12, 167 in DX9). The GTX 880M's lack of comparable Passmark data means we cannot assess its DirectX performance against the P2200's. The 880M's Geekbench Metal score of 10,458, however, indicates it does have some compute capability in Apple's framework — a test the P2200 does not have recorded.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Quadro P2200 delivers 3.822 TFLOPS of fp32 performance, compared to the GTX 880M's 3.050 TFLOPS. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the P2200 scores 32,344 versus 5,622 for the 880M, a 475.3% advantage.

Q: Do these cards support the same API versions?

A: No. The Quadro P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 880M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The P2200 uses 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus with 200.2 GB/s bandwidth. The 880M uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The P2200 achieves higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro P2200 has a 75 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX 880M has a 122 W TDP, is an MXM module, and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Quadro P2200 averages 8,686, placing it in the 44th percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 880M averages 8,040, in the 42nd percentile.

Q: Are either of these cards still in production?

A: Neither card is in production. Both are listed as end-of-life. The P2200's production status is end-of-life, and the GTX 880M's production status is also end-of-life.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,400 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 22.0M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 954 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1493 MHz | 993 MHz |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 160 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 200.2 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 80 | 128 |

| ROPs | 40 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | 31.78 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 119.4 GTexel/s | 127.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.822 TFLOPS | 3.050 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64) | Not listed |

| TDP | 75 W | 122 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2019-06-09 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Maxwell | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | Quadro Volta | GeForce 900M |

# The Verdict

The data clearly favors the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 for compute-oriented workloads. Its 475.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with higher fp32 throughput, greater memory bandwidth, and a more modern architecture, makes it the superior choice for tasks that leverage general-purpose GPU computing. The P2200's 44th percentile ranking versus the 880M's 42nd percentile reinforces this advantage, even if the margin in average scores is modest.

However, the GTX 880M is not without rationale for specific use cases. Its 8 GB memory capacity exceeds the P2200's 5 GB, which could benefit workloads requiring larger framebuffers. The 880M's higher shading unit count (1,536 vs 1,280) and texture rate (127.1 vs 119.4 GTexel/s) suggest it may hold its own in certain texture-heavy scenarios, though no direct benchmark confirms this. Its Geekbench Metal score of 10,458 indicates functional macOS compute support, a feature absent from the P2200's recorded benchmarks.

For professionals seeking a durable, efficient workstation card with modern API support and strong compute performance, the Quadro P2200 is the data-backed choice. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot form factor, and four DisplayPort outputs make it suitable for multi-display professional environments. The GTX 880M, as an end-of-life MXM module from 2014, offers larger memory capacity but older architecture, lower bandwidth, and significantly weaker compute results. The verdict is straightforward: the Quadro P2200 wins on the evidence, with the 880M's only advantages being memory size and its Metal benchmark score.