Quadro K1000M vs Radeon Pro 560X

Place in the ranking	458	878
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.37
Power efficiency	8.80	3.11
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Polaris 21	GK107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	16 July 2018 (6 years ago)	1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$119.90

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 cores	1024	192
Core clock speed	1004 MHz	850 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	64.26	13.60
Floating-point processing power	2.056 TFLOPS	0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	64	16

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	large	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1270 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	81.28 GB/s	28.8 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

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	+	-
Optimus	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
CUDA	-	+

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.

Pro 560X 9.53
+372%

K1000M 2.02

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.

Pro 560X 3677
+372%

K1000M 779

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.

Pro 560X 7590
+589%

K1000M 1102

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Pro 560X 17555
+922%

K1000M 1718

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Pro 560X 17037
+1029%

K1000M 1509

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:

900p	40−45 +344%	9 −344%
Full HD	38 +138%	16 −138%
1440p	27 +440%	5−6 −440%
4K	17 +467%	3−4 −467%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	7.49
1440p	no data	23.98
4K	no data	39.97

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16
+275%

4−5

−275%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	31 +343%	7−8 −343%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Battlefield 5	49 +4800%	1−2 −4800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	29 +480%	5−6 −480%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Far Cry 5	28 +833%	3−4 −833%
Far Cry New Dawn	38 +660%	5−6 −660%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +700%	8−9 −700%
Hitman 3	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Metro Exodus	41 +413%	8−9 −413%
Red Dead Redemption 2	36 +800%	4−5 −800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	57 +470%	10−11 −470%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +77.1%	35−40 −77.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50 +614%	7−8 −614%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Battlefield 5	42 +4100%	1−2 −4100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	25 +400%	5−6 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Far Cry 5	26 +767%	3−4 −767%
Far Cry New Dawn	28 +460%	5−6 −460%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +700%	8−9 −700%
Hitman 3	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Metro Exodus	33 +450%	6−7 −450%
Red Dead Redemption 2	29 +625%	4−5 −625%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +210%	10−11 −210%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +117%	12−14 −117%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +77.1%	35−40 −77.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14 +100%	7−8 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +260%	5−6 −260%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Far Cry 5	19 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	36 +350%	8−9 −350%
Hitman 3	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +210%	10−11 −210%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +77.1%	35−40 −77.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

25
+525%

4−5

−525%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +400%	3−4 −400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +413%	8−9 −413%
Hitman 3	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +233%	6−7 −233%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +445%	10−12 −445%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16
+220%

5−6

−220%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Hitman 3	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +400%	8−9 −400%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+200%

3−4

−200%

This is how Pro 560X and K1000M compete in popular games:

Pro 560X is 344% faster in 900p
Pro 560X is 138% faster in 1080p
Pro 560X is 440% faster in 1440p
Pro 560X is 467% faster in 4K

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Pro 560X is 4800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Pro 560X surpassed K1000M in all 53 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.53	2.02
Recency	16 July 2018	1 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	45 Watt

Pro 560X has a 371.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

K1000M, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 560X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.