Quadro T1200 Mobile vs Radeon R9 380X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 380X with Quadro T1200 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R9 380X
2015, $229
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
14.66

T1200 Mobile outperforms R9 380X by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking397350
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.03no data
Power efficiency5.9474.22
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameAntiguaTU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date19 November 2015 (10 years ago)12 April 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores20481024
Compute units32no data
Core clock speedno data855 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHz1425 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate124.291.20
Floating-point processing power3.973 TFLOPS2.918 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs12864
L1 Cache512 KB1 MB
L2 Cache512 KB1024 KB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors​2 x 6-pinno data
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan+1.2
Mantle+-
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 380X 14.66
T1200 Mobile 17.35
+18.3%

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.

R9 380X 9510
T1200 Mobile 10134
+6.6%

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 HD45−50
−28.9%
58
+28.9%
1440p27−30
−22.2%
33
+22.2%
4K65−70
−24.6%
81
+24.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.09no data
1440p8.48no data
4K3.52no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 65
+0%
65
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Dota 2 114
+0%
114
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 71
+0%
71
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 71
+0%
71
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Dota 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Far Cry 5 56
+0%
56
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+0%
37
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 109
+0%
109
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how R9 380X and T1200 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T1200 Mobile is 29% faster in 1080p
  • T1200 Mobile is 22% faster in 1440p
  • T1200 Mobile is 25% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 45 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.66 17.35
Recency 19 November 2015 12 April 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 18 Watt

T1200 Mobile has a 18% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 133% more advanced lithography process, and 956% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 380X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 380X is a desktop graphics card while Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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.


3.8 220 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 166 votes

Rate Quadro T1200 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 380X or Quadro T1200 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.