Quadro K1200 vs GeForce GTX 980

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 980
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 165 Watt
28.78
+281%

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by a whopping 281% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking179497
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.694.98
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGM204GM107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date19 September 2014 (9 years ago)28 January 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 $321.97
Current price$339 (0.6x MSRP)$124 (0.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980 has 95% better value for money than Quadro K1200.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2048512
CUDA cores2048no data
Core clock speed1064 MHz1058 MHz
Boost clock speed1216 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate144 billion/sec35.97
Floating-point performance4,981 gflops1,151 gflops

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length10.5" (26.7 cm)160 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1" (2.5 cm)
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinsNone
SLI options+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 typeGDDR5128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/sUp to 80 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2mDP mDP mDP mDP
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream+no data
GeForce ShadowPlay+no data
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data
BatteryBoost+no data
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.45
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA+5.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 980 28.78
+281%
Quadro K1200 7.56

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by 281% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 980 11125
+280%
Quadro K1200 2924

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by 280% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 980 33572
+284%
Quadro K1200 8739

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by 284% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 980 40029
+410%
Quadro K1200 7848

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by 410% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 980 29546
+226%
Quadro K1200 9073

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by 226% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 980 96
+269%
Quadro K1200 26

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro K1200 by 269% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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 HD94
+292%
24−27
−292%
1440p51
+325%
12−14
−325%
4K40
+300%
10−12
−300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 69
+283%
18−20
−283%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+317%
12−14
−317%
Battlefield 5 86
+310%
21−24
−310%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 84
+300%
21−24
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 77
+328%
18−20
−328%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+329%
21−24
−329%
Hitman 3 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+321%
24−27
−321%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+286%
21−24
−286%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+317%
18−20
−317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+329%
21−24
−329%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+286%
14−16
−286%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 58
+314%
14−16
−314%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+317%
12−14
−317%
Battlefield 5 74
+311%
18−20
−311%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+288%
8−9
−288%
Forza Horizon 4 83
+295%
21−24
−295%
Hitman 3 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+321%
24−27
−321%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+286%
21−24
−286%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+317%
18−20
−317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+333%
6−7
−333%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85
+305%
21−24
−305%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+286%
14−16
−286%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+289%
9−10
−289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+317%
12−14
−317%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 50
+317%
12−14
−317%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+321%
14−16
−321%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+321%
24−27
−321%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+286%
21−24
−286%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+283%
12−14
−283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+286%
14−16
−286%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+317%
18−20
−317%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+292%
12−14
−292%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+294%
16−18
−294%
Hitman 3 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+340%
5−6
−340%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+286%
7−8
−286%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+329%
7−8
−329%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Far Cry 5 48
+300%
12−14
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 48
+300%
12−14
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+329%
14−16
−329%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+306%
16−18
−306%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+311%
9−10
−311%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 50−55
+325%
12−14
−325%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Hitman 3 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+325%
4−5
−325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+314%
7−8
−314%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+367%
3−4
−367%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Battlefield 5 32
+300%
8−9
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+325%
8−9
−325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%

This is how GTX 980 and Quadro K1200 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 is 292% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 is 325% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980 is 300% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.78 7.56
Recency 19 September 2014 28 January 2015
Cost $549 $321.97
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 45 Watt

The GeForce GTX 980 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1200 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 is a desktop card while Quadro K1200 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
GeForce GTX 980
NVIDIA Quadro K1200
Quadro K1200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


4.3 1298 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 85 votes

Rate Quadro K1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.