NVIDIA Quadro 6000 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one benchmark where both the NVIDIA Quadro 6000 and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 appear in the same test. That test is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The Quadro P2200 scores 32,344 points, while the Quadro 6000 scores 9,846 points. This gives the P2200 a 69.6% advantage, which is a massive margin in raw compute throughput. In practical terms, the P2200 delivers more than three times the OpenCL performance of the older Fermi-based card.

The Quadro 6000's average benchmark score across its recorded tests is 9,846, which places it at the 47th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M at 9,832 (0.1% slower), the AMD FirePro W5000 at 9,803 (0.4% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 at 9,780 (0.7% slower). The only faster neighbor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M at 9,959, which is 1.1% ahead. This cluster of scores indicates that the Quadro 6000 sits firmly in the mid-range of the database's performance distribution, and its single benchmark score is not an outlier relative to its immediate competition.

The Quadro P2200, by contrast, presents a more complex picture. Its average benchmark score is 8,686, which actually falls below its Geekbench OpenCL result because the database also records several PassMark tests for this card. The P2200's percentile ranking is 44th across all GPUs, slightly lower than the Quadro 6000's 47th percentile. The nearest rivals to the P2200's average score include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 at 8,743 (0.7% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8,746 (0.7% faster), the AMD FirePro W5170M at 8,595 (1.1% slower), and the Intel Arc A380 at 8,558 (1.5% slower). The P2200's individual benchmark scores vary widely, from a low of 33 in PassMark DirectX 12 to a high of 32,344 in Geekbench OpenCL, which explains why its average is dragged down by the less demanding DirectX tests.

When comparing the two cards directly, the head-to-head data shows the P2200 winning the only shared test with a 69.6% margin. The Quadro 6000 records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison, while the P2200 records one win. This is a clean sweep in the only measured domain, but it is important to note that the database contains just a single overlapping benchmark. The Geekbench OpenCL test exercises general-purpose compute workloads, and the P2200's architecture is clearly far better suited to that task. The Quadro 6000's 9,846 score is not merely lower; it is in a different performance class entirely.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is the superior choice for anyone whose workload involves OpenCL compute. The 69.6% performance gap in Geekbench OpenCL is not a marginal difference; it is a fundamental generational leap. The P2200's 32,344 score versus the Quadro 6000's 9,846 score means the newer card completes compute tasks in roughly a third of the time, assuming linear scaling.

The Quadro 6000 does hold a slight edge in database percentile ranking, sitting at 47th compared to the P2200's 44th. However, this ranking is based on average scores across different test suites, and the Quadro 6000 has only one recorded benchmark while the P2200 has nine. The P2200's average is pulled down by legacy DirectX tests that are likely less relevant to modern professional workloads. Users who heavily rely on OpenCL acceleration should choose the P2200 without hesitation.

For users whose applications depend on older DirectX 9 or DirectX 10 paths, the P2200 still shows reasonable results: 167 in PassMark DirectX 9 and 45 in PassMark DirectX 10. The Quadro 6000 has no recorded scores in those tests, so no direct comparison is possible. The P2200 also records a PassMark G3D score of 9,364 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 3,921, which are not mirrored by the Quadro 6000 in the database.

The production status for both cards is end-of-life, so neither is a current product. The Quadro 6000 was released in December 2010, while the P2200 came in June 2019, a gap of roughly eight and a half years. The P2200 is the more modern design, and the benchmark data reflects that. The verdict is clear: the P2200 wins the only head-to-head test and offers far broader benchmark coverage. The Quadro 6000's only distinction is its higher percentile rank, which is a statistical artifact of having a single, relatively strong score.

Architecture Differences

The two cards belong to different architectural generations entirely. The NVIDIA Quadro 6000 is built on the Fermi architecture, using the GF100 chip. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP106 chip. This architectural divide accounts for most of the performance difference observed in the benchmarks.

The manufacturing process tells a similar story. The Quadro 6000 is fabricated on a 40 nm node at TSMC, while the P2200 uses a 16 nm node, also at TSMC. The smaller node allows the P2200 to pack 4,400 million transistors into a die size of 200 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 22.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The Quadro 6000 contains 3,100 million transistors on a much larger 529 mm² die, giving it a density of just 5.9 million per square millimeter. The P2200 achieves nearly four times the transistor density of the Quadro 6000.

The shading unit counts differ substantially. The Quadro 6000 has 448 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The P2200 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The P2200 more than doubles the shading unit count, which directly explains its superior OpenCL compute performance. However, the Quadro 6000 has more ROPs (48 versus 40), which historically helps with fill-rate-bound workloads.

The pixel and texture rates reflect these differences. The Quadro 6000 achieves 16.07 GPixel/s and 32.14 GTexel/s. The P2200 reaches 59.72 GPixel/s and 119.4 GTexel/s. The P2200 is about 3.7 times faster in pixel throughput and 3.7 times faster in texture throughput. FP32 compute is similarly lopsided: the Quadro 6000 delivers 1,027.7 GFLOPS, while the P2200 delivers 3.822 TFLOPS, a 3.7 times advantage.

The P2200 also supports FP16 at 59.72 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, a feature the Quadro 6000 does not list. The P2200 supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Quadro 6000 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no listed Vulkan support. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The memory subsystems are notably different. The Quadro 6000 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 143.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus, yet delivers 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite having 1 GB less memory and a narrower bus, the P2200 achieves 40% more bandwidth thanks to its faster memory clock: 10 Gbps effective versus 3 Gbps effective for the Quadro 6000.

The clock specifications differ in structure. The Quadro 6000 has no listed base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The P2200 has a base clock of 1000 MHz, a boost clock of 1493 MHz, and a memory clock of 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective). The P2200's boost clock is nearly 50% above its base, indicating aggressive dynamic frequency scaling.

Power requirements are dramatically different. The Quadro 6000 has a TDP of 204 W, requires dual-slot cooling, and uses one 6-pin plus one 8-pin power connector. The suggested power supply is 550 W. The P2200 has a TDP of 75 W, uses single-slot cooling, and requires no external power connectors. Its suggested power supply is 250 W. The P2200 draws 63% less power while delivering far more compute performance, a clear efficiency win.

The bus interfaces also differ: the Quadro 6000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the P2200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The display outputs are different as well. The Quadro 6000 offers one DVI, two DisplayPort outputs, and one S-Video. The P2200 provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, which is more modern and flexible for multi-monitor setups.

Physical dimensions show the P2200 is shorter at 201 mm (7.9 inches) versus 248 mm (9.8 inches) for the Quadro 6000. Both cards are 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height. The generation naming differs: the Quadro 6000 is part of the Quadro Fermi (x000) generation, while the P2200 belongs to the Quadro Pascal (Px200) generation. The Quadro 6000's predecessor is Quadro FX Tesla and its successor is Quadro Kepler. The P2200's predecessor is Quadro Maxwell and its successor is Quadro Volta.

FAQ

Q: Which card performs better in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is far ahead, scoring 32,344 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 9,846 for the Quadro 6000, a 69.6% margin in favor of the P2200.

Q: Does the Quadro 6000 have any advantage in the database rankings?

A: Yes, the Quadro 6000 sits at the 47th percentile of all GPUs, while the P2200 is at the 44th percentile. However, the Quadro 6000's ranking is based on a single benchmark score, while the P2200 has nine recorded benchmarks.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The P2200 delivers 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth from 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 160-bit bus. The Quadro 6000 provides 143.4 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The P2200 has higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro 6000 has a 204 W TDP, requires dual-slot cooling, and needs one 6-pin plus one 8-pin power connector with a suggested 550 W power supply. The P2200 has a 75 W TDP, uses single-slot cooling, needs no external power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX and OpenGL versions?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6. They differ in DirectX: the Quadro 6000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The P2200 also supports Vulkan 1.4, which the Quadro 6000 does not list.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The P2200 has 1,280 shading units, significantly more than the Quadro 6000's 448. The P2200 also has 80 TMUs versus 56, but the Quadro 6000 has 48 ROPs versus the P2200's 40.