GeForce GTX 1630 vs Quadro T1200 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro T1200 Mobile with GeForce GTX 1630, including specs and performance data.
T1200 Mobile outperforms GTX 1630 by an impressive 50% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 291 | 392 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 74.38 | 11.93 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | TU117 | TU117 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 12 April 2021 (3 years ago) | 28 June 2022 (2 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 cores | 1024 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 855 MHz | 1740 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1425 MHz | 1785 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,700 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 91.20 | 57.12 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.918 TFLOPS | 1.828 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 64 | 32 |
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 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 145 mm |
| 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 | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 96 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 DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 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 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 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
+65.7%
| 35−40
−65.7%
|
| 1440p | 33
+57.1%
| 21−24
−57.1%
|
| 4K | 81
+62%
| 50−55
−62%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+62.5%
|
24−27
−62.5%
|
| Elden Ring | 53
+51.4%
|
35−40
−51.4%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+55%
|
40−45
−55%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 17
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Elden Ring | 47
+56.7%
|
30−33
−56.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65
+62.5%
|
40−45
−62.5%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+58.5%
|
65−70
−58.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+64%
|
50−55
−64%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+55.3%
|
85−90
−55.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+50%
|
30−33
−50%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+56%
|
50−55
−56%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+55%
|
40−45
−55%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14
+55.6%
|
9−10
−55.6%
|
| Dota 2 | 114
+52%
|
75−80
−52%
|
| Elden Ring | 38
+58.3%
|
24−27
−58.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 59
+68.6%
|
35−40
−68.6%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+58.5%
|
65−70
−58.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+64%
|
50−55
−64%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 71
+57.8%
|
45−50
−57.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+73.3%
|
30−33
−73.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+55.3%
|
85−90
−55.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 45−50
+50%
|
30−33
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 71
+57.8%
|
45−50
−57.8%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+56%
|
50−55
−56%
|
| World of Tanks | 220−230
+52%
|
150−160
−52%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+55%
|
40−45
−55%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 11
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 107
+52.9%
|
70−75
−52.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 56
+60%
|
35−40
−60%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+64%
|
50−55
−64%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+55.3%
|
85−90
−55.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 37
+54.2%
|
24−27
−54.2%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 100−110
+58.5%
|
65−70
−58.5%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Elden Ring | 30−35
+52.4%
|
21−24
−52.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 37
+54.2%
|
24−27
−54.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+63%
|
27−30
−63%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+62.5%
|
16−18
−62.5%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+66.7%
|
30−33
−66.7%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+66.7%
|
24−27
−66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 41
+51.9%
|
27−30
−51.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+66.7%
|
30−33
−66.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 50−55
+66.7%
|
30−33
−66.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Elden Ring | 14−16
+55.6%
|
9−10
−55.6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+57.1%
|
21−24
−57.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+55.6%
|
9−10
−55.6%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+57.1%
|
21−24
−57.1%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+58.3%
|
12−14
−58.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Dota 2 | 109
+55.7%
|
70−75
−55.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+56.3%
|
16−18
−56.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+61.1%
|
18−20
−61.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+65.7%
|
35−40
−65.7%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
This is how T1200 Mobile and GTX 1630 compete in popular games:
- T1200 Mobile is 66% faster in 1080p
- T1200 Mobile is 57% faster in 1440p
- T1200 Mobile is 62% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 19.45 | 13.00 |
| Recency | 12 April 2021 | 28 June 2022 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 75 Watt |
T1200 Mobile has a 49.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 316.7% lower power consumption.
GTX 1630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.
The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1630 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1630 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.
