NVIDIA Quadro K5000 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2200 Comparison

The Verdict

The data in the database separates these two workstation cards by a wide margin, though not in every metric. The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is the clear performance winner, taking both recorded head-to-head benchmark victories. Its average benchmark score of 8686 places it at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the K5000 sits at the 46th percentile with an average of 9637. The K5000’s higher average is driven by its three OpenCL, Vulkan, and Metal scores, which are relatively consistent, whereas the P2200’s average pulls from a broader set of tests including several lower DirectX scores.

For most professional workloads, the P2200 is the card to choose. It wins the two direct comparisons by over 64% in both OpenCL and Vulkan, and it does so with a lower 75 W TDP, a smaller single-slot footprint, and no auxiliary power connector. The K5000, by contrast, requires a 6-pin connector, a 300 W suggested PSU, and a dual-slot bracket, yet it still loses both head-to-head tests by a wide margin.

The K5000 is only preferable in one narrow scenario: if a workload relies on the legacy Metal API, where it records a score of 6324, a figure the P2200 does not have a recorded result for. Otherwise, the P2200’s newer architecture, higher clock speeds, and larger memory capacity make it the superior choice for compute, rendering, and general workstation tasks. The K5000 is a Kepler-era card that is end-of-life; the P2200 is also end-of-life but belongs to a later generation with more modern feature support.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent different design generations from NVIDIA. The Quadro K5000 uses the GK104 chip built on the Kepler architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The Quadro P2200, by contrast, uses the GP106 chip with the Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 4,400 million transistors on a smaller 200 mm² die, giving a density of 22.0M per mm². The Pascal chip is therefore both denser and more efficient in its use of silicon.

Core configuration differs as well. The K5000 has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The P2200 has fewer shading units at 1,280 and fewer TMUs at 80, but more ROPs at 40. Clock speeds heavily favor the P2200: its base clock is 1000 MHz with a boost of 1493 MHz, while the K5000 runs at a flat 706 MHz for both base and boost. This clock advantage, combined with the newer architecture, explains why the P2200 achieves higher pixel and texture rates despite having fewer cores.

Memory subsystems also diverge. The K5000 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth with an effective 5.4 Gbps memory speed. The P2200 offers 5 GB of GDDR5X on a narrower 160-bit bus, but achieves 200.2 GB/s of bandwidth thanks to a 10 Gbps effective memory speed. The P2200 thus provides both more capacity and higher bandwidth.

Feature support differs in the API stack. The K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The P2200 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The P2200 also has a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface versus the K5000’s PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are another point of difference: the K5000 has 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the P2200 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The P2200’s FP32 compute is rated at 3.822 TFLOPS, nearly double the K5000’s 2.169 TFLOPS. The P2200 also lists an FP16 rate of 59.72 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio, a figure absent for the K5000. Power draw reflects the efficiency gains: the P2200 is rated at 75 W TDP with no power connectors, while the K5000 draws 122 W and needs a 6-pin connector.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these cards, and the P2200 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the P2200 scores 32,344 against the K5000’s 11,418, a delta of -64.7% from the winner’s perspective. In Geekbench Vulkan, the P2200 scores 31,351 versus the K5000’s 11,169, a delta of -64.4%. Both results indicate the P2200 is roughly three times faster in these compute APIs.

These margins are substantial enough to define the relationship between the two cards. The K5000’s best recorded score is its OpenCL result of 11,418, which is still less than half of the P2200’s worst head-to-head score of 31,351. For any application leveraging OpenCL or Vulkan, the P2200 is in a different performance class entirely.

The K5000 does have one benchmark not shared by the P2200: Geekbench Metal, where it scores 6,324. This is lower than its OpenCL and Vulkan results, indicating that Metal is not a strength of this Kepler card. The P2200 has no Metal result in the database, so no comparison is possible on that API.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the P2200’s additional benchmarks show a mixed profile. Its Passmark G3D score is 9,364, which is respectable, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 3,921. However, its DirectX scores are low: 167 in DirectX 9, 70 in DirectX 11, 45 in DirectX 10, and 33 in DirectX 12. The K5000 does not have comparable Passmark results, so these cannot be directly compared. The P2200’s Passmark G2D score of 881 indicates moderate 2D performance. The K5000’s average benchmark score of 9,637 is higher than the P2200’s 8,686, but this is because the K5000’s three results are all in the 6,000 to 11,000 range, while the P2200’s average is dragged down by its low DirectX scores.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The Quadro P2200 wins decisively, scoring 32,344 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the K5000’s 11,418, a 64.7% advantage.

Q: Does the K5000 have any benchmark where it outperforms the P2200?

A: In the recorded head-to-head data, no. The P2200 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The K5000 does have a Geekbench Metal score of 6,324, but the P2200 has no Metal result for comparison.

Q: What are the memory capacities of each card?

A: The K5000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, while the P2200 has 5 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 160-bit bus.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The P2200, with 200.2 GB/s versus the K5000’s 172.8 GB/s.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The P2200 is rated at 75 W TDP with no power connectors, while the K5000 is rated at 122 W and requires a single 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The P2200, at 22.0M transistors per mm², compared to the K5000’s 12.0M per mm².

Where Each One Wins

The P2200 wins in every scenario where the two cards have directly comparable data. For OpenCL compute tasks, its 32,344 score versus 11,418 represents a 64.7% lead. For Vulkan workloads, its 31,351 versus 11,169 is a 64.4% lead. These are the only two tests where both cards have results, and the P2200 dominates both. This makes it the obvious choice for GPU-accelerated compute, rendering, machine learning inference, or any other workload that uses these open APIs.

The P2200 also wins on practical grounds. Its 75 W TDP means it can be powered entirely by the PCIe slot, with no auxiliary connector. Its single-slot design takes up less space in a workstation chassis. Its 5 GB memory capacity is 25% larger than the K5000’s 4 GB, which helps with larger datasets. Its PCIe 3.0 interface offers double the bandwidth of the K5000’s PCIe 2.0. Its four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support more modern displays than the K5000’s mix of dual DVI and dual DisplayPort 1.2.

The K5000’s only unique benefit is its Geekbench Metal score of 6,324. For users running Metal-based applications on macOS or in environments that require that API, the K5000 has a recorded result. However, this score is lower than its own OpenCL and Vulkan scores, suggesting it is not a strong Metal performer in absolute terms. The K5000 also has a higher average benchmark score (9,637 versus 8,686), but this is an artifact of the different test suites each card was subjected to, not a sign of superior performance.

For any new deployment, the P2200 is the clear choice based on the recorded data. Its wins are not marginal; they are by factors of roughly three. The K5000 should only be considered if a specific software stack requires the Kepler architecture or the Metal API, and even then, its performance is modest relative to its successor.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The K5000 uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm process, while the P2200 uses GP106 on 16 nm. Transistor counts are 3,540 million versus 4,400 million, with die sizes of 294 mm² versus 200 mm². Transistor density is 12.0M per mm² for the K5000 and 22.0M per mm² for the P2200.

Clock speeds: the K5000 runs at 706 MHz base and boost, while the P2200 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1493 MHz boost. Memory speeds are 5.4 Gbps effective for the K5000 and 10 Gbps effective for the P2200. Memory capacity is 4 GB GDDR5 versus 5 GB GDDR5X. Bus widths are 256-bit versus 160-bit. Bandwidth is 172.8 GB/s versus 200.2 GB/s.

Core counts: the K5000 has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The P2200 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. Pixel rates are 22.59 GPixel/s versus 59.72 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 90.37 GTexel/s versus 119.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.169 TFLOPS versus 3.822 TFLOPS. The P2200 also has an FP16 rate of 59.72 GFLOPS (1:64), which the K5000 lacks.

Power and physical specs: the K5000 has a 122 W TDP, dual-slot width, a 6-pin power connector, and a 300 W suggested PSU. The P2200 has a 75 W TDP, single-slot width, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The K5000 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall; the P2200 is 201 mm long and 111 mm tall. The K5000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the P2200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Display outputs: the K5000 has 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The P2200 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. API support: the K5000 offers DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The P2200 offers DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The K5000 was released on 2012-08-16 with a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD; the P2200 was released on 2019-06-09 with no recorded launch MSRP. Both cards are end-of-life. The K5000’s predecessor is Quadro Fermi and successor is Quadro Maxwell; the P2200’s predecessor is Quadro Maxwell and successor is Quadro Volta.