Quadro T1200 Mobile vs ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X850 XT Platinum with Quadro T1200 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

ATI X850 XT Platinum
2004
256 MB GDDR3, 67 Watt
0.21

T1200 Mobile outperforms ATI X850 XT Platinum by a whopping 9157% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1381286
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.2275.17
ArchitectureR400 (2004−2008)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameR480TU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date21 December 2004 (19 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 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 coresno data1024
Core clock speed540 MHz855 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1425 MHz
Number of transistors160 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)67 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate8.64091.20
Floating-point processing powerno data2.918 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs1664

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
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed590 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth37.76 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0b (9_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.2
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 HD0−158
1440p-0−133
4K0−181

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 47
+0%
47
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 65
+0%
65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60
+0%
60
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 59
+0%
59
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 54
+0%
54
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 28
+0%
28
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 47
+0%
47
+0%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 44
+0%
44
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 71
+0%
71
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 47
+0%
47
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21
+0%
21
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 56
+0%
56
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+0%
37
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 19
+0%
19
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 32
+0%
32
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18
+0%
18
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
+0%
12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.21 19.44
Recency 21 December 2004 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 67 Watt 18 Watt

T1200 Mobile has a 9157.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 983.3% more advanced lithography process, and 272.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X850 XT Platinum in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon X850 XT Platinum is a desktop card while Quadro T1200 Mobile 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.


ATI Radeon X850 XT Platinum
Radeon X850 XT Platinum
NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
Quadro T1200 Mobile

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.


5 1 vote

Rate Radeon X850 XT Platinum on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 141 vote

Rate Quadro T1200 Mobile 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.