Quadro T1200 Mobile vs FirePro S9000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro S9000 with Quadro T1200 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
T1200 Mobile outperforms S9000 by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 445 | 349 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.44 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.13 | 74.15 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Tahiti | TU117 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 24 August 2012 (13 years ago) | 12 April 2021 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1792 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 855 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1425 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 18 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 | 91.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.226 TFLOPS | 2.918 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 112 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 448 KB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 1024 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Form factor | full height / full length | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1375 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 264 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | no data |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 40−45
−45%
| 58
+45%
|
| 1440p | 21−24
−57.1%
| 33
+57.1%
|
| 4K | 55−60
−47.3%
| 81
+47.3%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 62.48 | no data |
| 1440p | 119.00 | no data |
| 4K | 45.44 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65
+0%
|
65
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 114
+0%
|
114
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 71
+0%
|
71
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 71
+0%
|
71
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 107
+0%
|
107
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 56
+0%
|
56
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Valorant | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 41
+0%
|
41
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Valorant | 100−105
+0%
|
100−105
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 109
+0%
|
109
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
This is how FirePro S9000 and T1200 Mobile compete in popular games:
- T1200 Mobile is 45% faster in 1080p
- T1200 Mobile is 57% faster in 1440p
- T1200 Mobile is 47% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 51 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.10 | 17.36 |
| Recency | 24 August 2012 | 12 April 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 18 Watt |
FirePro S9000 has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.
T1200 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 43.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1844.4% lower power consumption.
The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S9000 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro S9000 is a workstation graphics card while Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
