Radeon RX 6400 vs Quadro T1200 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro T1200 Mobile with Radeon RX 6400, including specs and performance data.
RX 6400 outperforms T1200 Mobile by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 292 | 285 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 92 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 53.19 |
| Power efficiency | 74.51 | 25.75 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | TU117 | Navi 24 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 12 April 2021 (3 years ago) | 19 January 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $159 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 1024 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 855 MHz | 1923 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1425 MHz | 2321 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,700 million | 5,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 53 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 91.20 | 111.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.918 TFLOPS | 3.565 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 48 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 12 |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 128.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | - |
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 HD | 58
+5.5%
| 55−60
−5.5%
|
| 1440p | 33
+10%
| 30−35
−10%
|
| 4K | 81
+1.3%
| 80−85
−1.3%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 2.89 |
| 1440p | no data | 5.30 |
| 4K | no data | 1.99 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+11.4%
|
35−40
−11.4%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 17
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+4%
|
100−105
−4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+2.5%
|
80−85
−2.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+4%
|
50−55
−4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+1.5%
|
130−140
−1.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−1.3%
|
80−85
+1.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 114
+3.6%
|
110−120
−3.6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 59
−1.7%
|
60−65
+1.7%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+4%
|
100−105
−4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+2.5%
|
80−85
−2.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+4%
|
50−55
−4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 71
+1.4%
|
70−75
−1.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+1.5%
|
130−140
−1.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 71
+1.4%
|
70−75
−1.4%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−1.3%
|
80−85
+1.3%
|
| World of Tanks | 220−230
−0.9%
|
230−240
+0.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 11
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Dota 2 | 107
+7%
|
100−105
−7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 56
+1.8%
|
55−60
−1.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+2.5%
|
80−85
−2.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+1.5%
|
130−140
−1.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 37
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 100−110
+4%
|
100−105
−4%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 37
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 41
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+10%
|
30−33
−10%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+10%
|
30−33
−10%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 109
−0.9%
|
110−120
+0.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+5.5%
|
55−60
−5.5%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
This is how T1200 Mobile and RX 6400 compete in popular games:
- T1200 Mobile is 5% faster in 1080p
- T1200 Mobile is 10% faster in 1440p
- T1200 Mobile is 1% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.74 | 19.07 |
| Recency | 12 April 2021 | 19 January 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 53 Watt |
T1200 Mobile has 194.4% lower power consumption.
RX 6400, on the other hand, has a 1.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro T1200 Mobile and Radeon RX 6400.
Be aware that Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6400 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
