Quadro NVS 290 vs Quadro K1200

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1200 and Quadro NVS 290, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K1200
2015
4 GB 128-bit, 45 Watt
7.62
+1192%

K1200 outperforms NVS 290 by a whopping 1192% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5261203
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.650.03
Power efficiency11.791.96
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGM107G86
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date28 January 2015 (9 years ago)4 October 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$321.97 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K1200 has 8733% better value for money than NVS 290.

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 cores51216
Core clock speed1058 MHz459 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt21 Watt
Texture fill rate35.973.672
Floating-point processing power1.151 TFLOPS0.02938 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs328

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length160 mm168 mm
Width1" (2.5 cm)1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 type128 BitDDR2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 80 GB/s6.4 GB/s

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 mini-DisplayPort1x DMS-59
Number of simultaneous displays4no data

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
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.01.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

Quadro K1200 7.62
+1192%
NVS 290 0.59

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.

Quadro K1200 2939
+1189%
NVS 290 228

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.62 0.59
Recency 28 January 2015 4 October 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 21 Watt

Quadro K1200 has a 1191.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 290, on the other hand, has 114.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K1200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 290 in performance tests.


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 Quadro K1200
Quadro K1200
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 290
Quadro NVS 290

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.


4.1 100 votes

Rate Quadro K1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 21 vote

Rate Quadro NVS 290 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.