Quadro T1000 Mobile vs Radeon R7 M275DX

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M275DX with Quadro T1000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R7 M275DX
2014
3.27

T1000 Mobile outperforms R7 M275DX by a whopping 408% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking745332
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data23.34
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameno dataTU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date4 June 2014 (10 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores896768
Core clock speedno data1395 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1455 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data69.84
Floating-point processing powerno data2.235 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data48

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 dataNo outputs
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

R7 M275DX 3.27
T1000 Mobile 16.62
+408%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R7 M275DX 3553
T1000 Mobile 11377
+220%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R7 M275DX 8309
T1000 Mobile 31509
+279%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R7 M275DX 1932
T1000 Mobile 8727
+352%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R7 M275DX 11160
T1000 Mobile 53629
+381%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R7 M275DX 86346
T1000 Mobile 375510
+335%

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 HD24
−163%
63
+163%
4K9−10
−433%
48
+433%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
−413%
40−45
+413%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−190%
27−30
+190%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−371%
30−35
+371%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
−413%
40−45
+413%
Battlefield 5 10−12
−445%
60
+445%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−190%
27−30
+190%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−371%
30−35
+371%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−786%
62
+786%
Fortnite 16−18
−418%
85−90
+418%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−340%
65−70
+340%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−633%
40−45
+633%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−321%
55−60
+321%
Valorant 45−50
−165%
120−130
+165%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
−413%
40−45
+413%
Battlefield 5 10−12
−373%
52
+373%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−190%
27−30
+190%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 47
−340%
200−210
+340%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−371%
30−35
+371%
Dota 2 30−33
−280%
114
+280%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−714%
57
+714%
Fortnite 16−18
−418%
85−90
+418%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−340%
65−70
+340%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−633%
40−45
+633%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
−656%
68
+656%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−580%
34
+580%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−321%
55−60
+321%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−530%
63
+530%
Valorant 45−50
−165%
120−130
+165%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−327%
47
+327%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−190%
27−30
+190%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−371%
30−35
+371%
Dota 2 30−33
−257%
107
+257%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−657%
53
+657%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−340%
65−70
+340%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−633%
40−45
+633%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−321%
55−60
+321%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−250%
35
+250%
Valorant 45−50
−165%
120−130
+165%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
−418%
85−90
+418%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−409%
110−120
+409%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−583%
150−160
+583%
Valorant 30−35
−416%
160−170
+416%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−457%
35−40
+457%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−625%
27−30
+625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
−500%
35−40
+500%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−81.3%
27−30
+81.3%
Valorant 16−18
−450%
85−90
+450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Dota 2 9−10
−433%
48
+433%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−833%
27−30
+833%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−275%
14−16
+275%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R7 M275DX and T1000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T1000 Mobile is 163% faster in 1080p
  • T1000 Mobile is 433% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the T1000 Mobile is 1900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T1000 Mobile is ahead in 60 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.27 16.62
Recency 4 June 2014 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm

T1000 Mobile has a 408.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T1000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M275DX in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M275DX is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T1000 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.


AMD Radeon R7 M275DX
Radeon R7 M275DX
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 Mobile
Quadro T1000

Other comparisons

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.


2.5 2 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M275DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 155 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 M275DX or Quadro T1000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.