Quadro K1200 vs GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1070 Ti with Quadro K1200, including specs and performance data.
1070 Ti outperforms K1200 by a whopping 395% 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 | 163 | 587 |
| Place by popularity | 69 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 22.82 | 1.15 |
| Power efficiency | 14.93 | 12.07 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell (2014−2017) |
| GPU code name | GP104 | GM107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 2 November 2017 (8 years ago) | 28 January 2015 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $321.97 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
GTX 1070 Ti has 1884% better value for money than Quadro K1200.
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 | 2432 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 1607 MHz | 954 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1683 MHz | 1033 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,200 million | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 255.8 | 33.06 |
| Floating-point processing power | 8.186 TFLOPS | 1.0578 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 16 |
| TMUs | 152 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 912 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 160 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1" (2.5 cm) |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |
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 | 128 Bit |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2002 MHz | 1253 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 256.3 GB/s | Up to 80 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |
| Number of simultaneous displays | no data | 4 |
| HDMI | + | - |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision Pro | no data | + |
| Mosaic | no data | + |
| VR Ready | + | no data |
| nView Desktop Management | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.7 (5.1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 6.1 | 5.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
GeekBench 5 OpenCL
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
GeekBench 5 CUDA
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.
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 | 112
+433%
| 21−24
−433%
|
| 1440p | 72
+414%
| 14−16
−414%
|
| 4K | 55
+450%
| 10−12
−450%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.56
+330%
| 15.33
−330%
|
| 1440p | 5.54
+315%
| 23.00
−315%
|
| 4K | 7.25
+344%
| 32.20
−344%
|
- GTX 1070 Ti has 330% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- GTX 1070 Ti has 315% lower cost per frame in 1440p
- GTX 1070 Ti has 344% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+395%
|
40−45
−395%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+413%
|
16−18
−413%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+421%
|
24−27
−421%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+395%
|
40−45
−395%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+413%
|
16−18
−413%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 114
+443%
|
21−24
−443%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+420%
|
30−33
−420%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+407%
|
27−30
−407%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+433%
|
21−24
−433%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+426%
|
27−30
−426%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+433%
|
40−45
−433%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+421%
|
24−27
−421%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+395%
|
40−45
−395%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+405%
|
55−60
−405%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+413%
|
16−18
−413%
|
| Dota 2 | 127
+429%
|
24−27
−429%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 108
+414%
|
21−24
−414%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+420%
|
30−33
−420%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+407%
|
27−30
−407%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+433%
|
21−24
−433%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| Metro Exodus | 66
+450%
|
12−14
−450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+426%
|
27−30
−426%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 120−130
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+433%
|
40−45
−433%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 111
+429%
|
21−24
−429%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+413%
|
16−18
−413%
|
| Dota 2 | 121
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 102
+467%
|
18−20
−467%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100
+456%
|
18−20
−456%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+426%
|
27−30
−426%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 72
+414%
|
14−16
−414%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+433%
|
40−45
−433%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 109
+419%
|
21−24
−419%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90
+444%
|
16−18
−444%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 240−250
+396%
|
50−55
−396%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+414%
|
14−16
−414%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+400%
|
35−40
−400%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+447%
|
45−50
−447%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 83
+419%
|
16−18
−419%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75
+436%
|
14−16
−436%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 81
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 40−45
+413%
|
8−9
−413%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+442%
|
12−14
−442%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 72
+414%
|
14−16
−414%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 67
+458%
|
12−14
−458%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Metro Exodus | 25
+400%
|
5−6
−400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 47
+422%
|
9−10
−422%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+440%
|
40−45
−440%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 47
+422%
|
9−10
−422%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Dota 2 | 105
+400%
|
21−24
−400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+457%
|
7−8
−457%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55
+450%
|
10−11
−450%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+400%
|
9−10
−400%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 36
+414%
|
7−8
−414%
|
This is how GTX 1070 Ti and Quadro K1200 compete in popular games:
- GTX 1070 Ti is 433% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1070 Ti is 414% faster in 1440p
- GTX 1070 Ti is 450% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 34.69 | 7.01 |
| Recency | 2 November 2017 | 28 January 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 45 Watt |
GTX 1070 Ti has a 394.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.
Quadro K1200, on the other hand, has 300% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1200 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1070 Ti is a desktop graphics card while Quadro K1200 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
