Quadro T1200 Mobile vs FirePro V7900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
FirePro V3900 FirePro V4900 FirePro V5900 FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900 SDI
VS
Quadro T400 Mobile Quadro T500 Mobile Quadro T600 Mobile Quadro T1000 Mobile Quadro T1000 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Mobile Quadro T2000 Mobile Quadro T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro V7900 with Quadro T1200 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FirePro V7900
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 151 Watt
5.41

T1200 Mobile outperforms V7900 by a whopping 232% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
T1200 Mobile Quadro T1200

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking614307
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.6473.05
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameCaymanTU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date24 May 2011 (13 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 years ago)

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 cores12801024
Core clock speed725 MHz855 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1425 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)151 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate58.0091.20
Floating-point processing power1.856 TFLOPS2.918 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8064

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 2.1 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length279 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.2
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 HD16−18
−263%
58
+263%
1440p9−10
−267%
33
+267%
4K24−27
−238%
81
+238%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+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 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+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 35−40
+0%
35−40
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+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 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+0%
37
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+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 Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

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 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 109
+0%
109
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how FirePro V7900 and T1200 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T1200 Mobile is 263% faster in 1080p
  • T1200 Mobile is 267% faster in 1440p
  • T1200 Mobile is 238% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 51 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 5.41 17.97
Recency 24 May 2011 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 151 Watt 18 Watt

T1200 Mobile has a 232.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 738.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V7900 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro V7900 is a workstation card while Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

AMD FirePro V7900
FirePro V7900
NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
Quadro T1200
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
vs
Quadro K620 Quadro K620
T1200 Mobile Quadro T1200 Mobile
vs
Pro 580X Radeon Pro 580X
FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
vs
GRID M10-8Q GRID M10 8Q
FirePro V4900 FirePro V4900
vs
GT 430 430
FirePro V4900 FirePro V4900
vs
R7 340 OEM 340 OEM
FirePro V4900 FirePro V4900
vs
GT 710 PCIe x1 710 PCIe x1
FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
vs
GT 630 630
FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
vs
A100 PCIe PCIe
Quadro P1000 Quadro P1000
vs
GTX 460 SE 460 SE
Quadro P1000 Quadro P1000
vs
Pro W6800X W6800X
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q 1050 Ti Max-Q
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
vs
RX 5800 5800
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
vs
RTX 3070 Ti Max-Q 3070 Ti Max-Q

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 17 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 151 vote

Rate Quadro T1200 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro V7900 or Quadro T1200 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.