Quadro M1200 vs Radeon RX 460

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 460 with Quadro M1200, including specs and performance data.

RX 460
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
10.63
+26.8%

RX 460 outperforms M1200 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking432501
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.12no data
Power efficiency9.8512.94
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameBaffinGM107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date8 August 2016 (8 years ago)11 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 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 cores896640
Core clock speed1090 MHz1093 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate67.2043.72
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPS1.399 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5640

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8MXM-A (3.0)
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s80 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
Optimus-+
3D Stereono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-5.0

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.

RX 460 10.63
+26.8%
Quadro M1200 8.38

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.

RX 460 4102
+26.9%
Quadro M1200 3232

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.

RX 460 8597
+61.9%
Quadro M1200 5310

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.

RX 460 5701
+37.7%
Quadro M1200 4142

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.

RX 460 34892
+26.6%
Quadro M1200 27557

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.

RX 460 307888
+28.1%
Quadro M1200 240298

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 HD40
+21.2%
33
−21.2%
1440p28
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
4K19
+72.7%
11
−72.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.15no data
1440p3.07no data
4K4.53no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 34
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+32%
24−27
−32%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+31.6%
18−20
−31.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+30.4%
21−24
−30.4%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+26.8%
55−60
−26.8%
Hitman 3 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+20.8%
45−50
−20.8%
Metro Exodus 44
+76%
24−27
−76%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+30.4%
21−24
−30.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+25%
27−30
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+12.1%
55−60
−12.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+157%
21−24
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 22
−13.6%
24−27
+13.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+31.6%
18−20
−31.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+34.8%
21−24
−34.8%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+26.8%
55−60
−26.8%
Hitman 3 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+20.8%
45−50
−20.8%
Metro Exodus 35
+40%
24−27
−40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+30.4%
21−24
−30.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+25%
27−30
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+12.1%
55−60
−12.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+31.6%
18−20
−31.6%
Forza Horizon 4 41
−36.6%
55−60
+36.6%
Hitman 3 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 36
−33.3%
45−50
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+25%
27−30
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+76.9%
13
−76.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+12.1%
55−60
−12.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+30.4%
21−24
−30.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+44.1%
30−35
−44.1%
Hitman 3 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 25
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+26.4%
50−55
−26.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+46.9%
30−35
−46.9%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+140%
5−6
−140%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%

This is how RX 460 and Quadro M1200 compete in popular games:

  • RX 460 is 21% faster in 1080p
  • RX 460 is 33% faster in 1440p
  • RX 460 is 73% faster in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 460 is 157% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro M1200 is 37% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 460 is ahead in 67 tests (93%)
  • Quadro M1200 is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.63 8.38
Recency 8 August 2016 11 January 2017
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 45 Watt

RX 460 has a 26.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro M1200, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 460 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 460 is a desktop card while Quadro M1200 is a mobile 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.


AMD Radeon RX 460
Radeon RX 460
NVIDIA Quadro M1200
Quadro M1200

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.


3.8 1025 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 333 votes

Rate Quadro M1200 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.