Quadro T1200 Mobile vs Radeon Pro 5300M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 5300M and Quadro T1200 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Pro 5300M
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 85 Watt
15.49

T1200 Mobile outperforms Pro 5300M by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking355300
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.4974.12
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNavi 14TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date13 November 2019 (5 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 cores12801024
Core clock speed1000 MHz855 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz1425 MHz
Number of transistors6,400 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate100.091.20
Floating-point processing power3.2 TFLOPS2.918 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8064

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
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 HD45−50
−28.9%
58
+28.9%
1440p24−27
−37.5%
33
+37.5%
4K60−65
−35%
81
+35%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Battlefield 5 60−65
−20.6%
75−80
+20.6%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−32.7%
65
+32.7%
Fortnite 80−85
−19.5%
95−100
+19.5%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−23%
75−80
+23%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−30.8%
50−55
+30.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−30.2%
65−70
+30.2%
Valorant 120−130
−15.8%
130−140
+15.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Battlefield 5 60−65
−20.6%
75−80
+20.6%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
−15.4%
220−230
+15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%
Dota 2 90−95
−23.9%
114
+23.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−20.4%
59
+20.4%
Fortnite 80−85
−19.5%
95−100
+19.5%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−23%
75−80
+23%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−30.8%
50−55
+30.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
−29.1%
71
+29.1%
Metro Exodus 30−33
−30%
35−40
+30%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−30.2%
65−70
+30.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−82.1%
71
+82.1%
Valorant 120−130
−15.8%
130−140
+15.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−20.6%
75−80
+20.6%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%
Dota 2 90−95
−16.3%
107
+16.3%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−14.3%
56
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−23%
75−80
+23%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−15.4%
45−50
+15.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−30.2%
65−70
+30.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+5.4%
37
−5.4%
Valorant 120−130
−25%
150−160
+25%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
−19.5%
95−100
+19.5%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
−22.2%
130−140
+22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−60.9%
37
+60.9%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−27.8%
21−24
+27.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−22.3%
170−180
+22.3%
Valorant 150−160
−16.7%
170−180
+16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−26.8%
50−55
+26.8%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−28.1%
41
+28.1%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−27.8%
45−50
+27.8%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−17.4%
27−30
+17.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
−31.3%
40−45
+31.3%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
−22.2%
30−35
+22.2%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−36.4%
14−16
+36.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−30%
24−27
+30%
Valorant 80−85
−28.8%
100−110
+28.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Dota 2 50−55
−110%
109
+110%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−28%
30−35
+28%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%

1440p
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how Pro 5300M and T1200 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T1200 Mobile is 29% faster in 1080p
  • T1200 Mobile is 38% faster in 1440p
  • T1200 Mobile is 35% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 5% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T1200 Mobile is 110% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • T1200 Mobile is ahead in 43 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.49 19.46
Recency 13 November 2019 12 April 2021
Chip lithography 7 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 18 Watt

Pro 5300M has a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

T1200 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 25.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 372.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1200 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 5300M in performance tests.

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 Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M
NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
Quadro T1200

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.


4 172 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 146 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro 5300M or Quadro T1200 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.