Radeon RX 560X Mobile vs Quadro K1200

Place in the ranking	526	424
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.69	no data
Power efficiency	11.64	11.43
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GM107	Polaris 21
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	28 January 2015 (9 years ago)	11 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$321.97	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	512	1024
Core clock speed	1058 MHz	1275 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	1202 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	35.97	81.60
Floating-point processing power	1.151 TFLOPS	2.611 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	64

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 size	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	160 mm	no data
Width	1" (2.5 cm)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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 type	128 Bit	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	1450 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 80 GB/s	92.8 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 Connectors	4x mini-DisplayPort	No outputs
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	-	+
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.

DirectX	12	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2.131
CUDA	5.0	-

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

21−24

−61.9%

34
+61.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

15.33

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	25 +0%	25 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30 +0%	30 +0%
Battlefield 5	49 +0%	49 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 +0%	17 +0%
Far Cry 5	35 +0%	35 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	42 +0%	42 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	109 +0%	109 +0%
Hitman 3	24 +0%	24 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Metro Exodus	45 +0%	45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	47 +0%	47 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	56 +0%	56 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	49 +0%	49 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21 +0%	21 +0%
Battlefield 5	36 +0%	36 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 +0%	15 +0%
Far Cry 5	29 +0%	29 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	28 +0%	28 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	105 +0%	105 +0%
Hitman 3	23 +0%	23 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Metro Exodus	36 +0%	36 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	42 +0%	42 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 +0%	16 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 +0%	13 +0%
Far Cry 5	21 +0%	21 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	38 +0%	38 +0%
Hitman 3	21 +0%	21 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	37 +0%	37 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 +0%	22 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	11 +0%	11 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Hitman 3	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+0%

18−20

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

+0%

10−11

+0%

This is how Quadro K1200 and RX 560X Mobile compete in popular games:

RX 560X Mobile is 62% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.64	10.83
Recency	28 January 2015	11 April 2018
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	65 Watt

Quadro K1200 has 44.4% lower power consumption.

RX 560X Mobile, on the other hand, has a 41.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 560X Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K1200 is a workstation card while Radeon RX 560X Mobile is a notebook one.

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