GRID K260Q vs Quadro M1200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M1200 with GRID K260Q, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M1200
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 45 Watt
8.38
+9.5%

M1200 outperforms GRID K260Q by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking502523
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.92
Power efficiency12.982.37
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM107GK104
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date11 January 2017 (7 years ago)28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$937

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 cores6401536
Core clock speed1093 MHz745 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate43.7295.36
Floating-point processing power1.399 TFLOPS2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs40128

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA5.03.0

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 M1200 8.38
+9.5%
GRID K260Q 7.65

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 M1200 3234
+9.7%
GRID K260Q 2949

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 HD33
+10%
30−35
−10%
4K11
+10%
10−12
−10%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data31.23
4Kno data93.70

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+12%
50−55
−12%
Hitman 3 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+20%
40−45
−20%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+16%
50−55
−16%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+12%
50−55
−12%
Hitman 3 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+20%
40−45
−20%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+16%
50−55
−16%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+12%
50−55
−12%
Hitman 3 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+20%
40−45
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+30%
10−11
−30%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+16%
50−55
−16%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
Hitman 3 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+17.8%
45−50
−17.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Hitman 3 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%

This is how Quadro M1200 and GRID K260Q compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M1200 is 10% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M1200 is 10% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.38 7.65
Recency 11 January 2017 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 225 Watt

Quadro M1200 has a 9.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 400% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M1200 and GRID K260Q.

Be aware that Quadro M1200 is a mobile workstation card while GRID K260Q 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 Quadro M1200
Quadro M1200
NVIDIA GRID K260Q
GRID K260Q

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.


3.4 333 votes

Rate Quadro M1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K260Q 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.