Quadro T1200 Mobile vs Quadro FX 4800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
CX FX 3800 FX 4800 FX 4800 Mac Edition FX 5800 Plex 2200 S4 Tesla C1060 Tesla C1080 Tesla M1060 Tesla S1070 Tesla S1075 Tesla T10 Processor
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
T400 Mobile T500 Mobile T600 Mobile T1000 Mobile T1000 Max-Q T1200 Max-Q T1200 Mobile T2000 Mobile T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 4800 with Quadro T1200 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 4800
2008, $1,799
1536 MB GDDR3, 150 Watt
2.39

T1200 Mobile outperforms FX 4800 by a whopping 624% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FX 4800 FX 4800
T1200 Mobile T1200 Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking883346
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency1.2374.12
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT200BTU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date11 November 2008 (17 years ago)12 April 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,799 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores1921024
Core clock speed602 MHz855 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1425 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate38.5391.20
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS2.918 TFLOPS
ROPs2432
TMUs6464
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cache192 KB1024 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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s160.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.37.5

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 HD8−9
−625%
58
+625%
1440p4−5
−725%
33
+725%
4K10−12
−710%
81
+710%

Cost per frame, $

1080p224.88no data
1440p449.75no data
4K179.90no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 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%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Dota 2 114
+0%
114
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 70−75
+0%
70−75
+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%
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 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Dota 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 56
+0%
56
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+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 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+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 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 109
+0%
109
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how FX 4800 and T1200 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T1200 Mobile is 625% faster in 1080p
  • T1200 Mobile is 725% faster in 1440p
  • T1200 Mobile is 710% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 50 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 2.39 17.30
Recency 11 November 2008 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 18 Watt

T1200 Mobile has a 623.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 358.3% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation graphics 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.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800
Quadro FX 4800
NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
Quadro T1200 Mobile
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

FX 4800 Quadro FX 4800
vs
Quadro CX Quadro CX
T1200 Mobile Quadro T1200 Mobile
vs
M5000M Quadro M5000M
FX 4800 Quadro FX 4800
vs
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
FirePro V7900 V7900
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
9600 GTX 9600 GTX
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
E9174 MXM E9174 MXM
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
T1000 Mobile T1000 Mobile
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
T1000 Max-Q T1000 Max-Q
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
GRID RTX T10-2 RTX T10-2
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
Iris Xe Graphics 80EU 80EU
FX 4800 NVIDIA FX 4800
vs
Jetson AGX Orin 64 GB AGX Orin 64 GB
FX 4800 Mac Edition NVIDIA FX 4800 Mac Edition
vs
Quadro2 MXR MXR
FX 4800 Mac Edition NVIDIA FX 4800 Mac Edition
vs
GTX 1060 6 GB GDDR5X 1060 6 GB GDDR5X

Community ratings

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

4 68 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 159 votes

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 Quadro FX 4800 or Quadro T1200 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.