Radeon Pro W6400 vs Quadro T1200 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro T1200 Mobile with Radeon Pro W6400, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6400 outperforms T1200 Mobile by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 284 | 258 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 74.64 | 29.00 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | TU117 | Navi 24 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 12 April 2021 (3 years ago) | 19 January 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 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 855 MHz | 2331 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1425 MHz | 2331 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,700 million | 5,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 91.20 | 111.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.918 TFLOPS | 3.58 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 48 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 12 |
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 4.0 x4 |
| 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 | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 112.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| 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 HD | 58
−3.4%
| 60−65
+3.4%
|
| 1440p | 33
−6.1%
| 35−40
+6.1%
|
| 4K | 81
−4.9%
| 85−90
+4.9%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40−45
−2.3%
|
45−50
+2.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 47
−6.4%
|
50−55
+6.4%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−7.7%
|
70−75
+7.7%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65
−7.7%
|
70−75
+7.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55
−3.8%
|
55−60
+3.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
−5.7%
|
130−140
+5.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 60
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
−3.8%
|
55−60
+3.8%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 59
−1.7%
|
60−65
+1.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 54
−1.9%
|
55−60
+1.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40−45
−2.3%
|
45−50
+2.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 28
−7.1%
|
30−33
+7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−7.7%
|
70−75
+7.7%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 59
−1.7%
|
60−65
+1.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55
−3.8%
|
55−60
+3.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
−5.7%
|
130−140
+5.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 47
−6.4%
|
50−55
+6.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
−1.4%
|
70−75
+1.4%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
−3.8%
|
55−60
+3.8%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 44
−2.3%
|
45−50
+2.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 71
−5.6%
|
75−80
+5.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 47
−6.4%
|
50−55
+6.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40−45
−2.3%
|
45−50
+2.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−7.7%
|
70−75
+7.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 56
−7.1%
|
60−65
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55
−3.8%
|
55−60
+3.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
−5.7%
|
130−140
+5.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 37
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 19
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Hitman 3 | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 32
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
−6.1%
|
35−40
+6.1%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 20−22
−5%
|
21−24
+5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 18
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−5.3%
|
40−45
+5.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 41
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+0.9%
|
110−120
−0.9%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 12
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Hitman 3 | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 100−110
−6.8%
|
110−120
+6.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
−5.9%
|
18−20
+5.9%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
−5%
|
21−24
+5%
|
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
−5%
|
21−24
+5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
This is how T1200 Mobile and Pro W6400 compete in popular games:
- Pro W6400 is 3% faster in 1080p
- Pro W6400 is 6% faster in 1440p
- Pro W6400 is 5% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 19.40 | 20.94 |
| Recency | 12 April 2021 | 19 January 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 50 Watt |
T1200 Mobile has 177.8% lower power consumption.
Pro W6400, on the other hand, has a 7.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro T1200 Mobile and Radeon Pro W6400.
Be aware that Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Pro W6400 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
