Quadro M1200 vs Radeon Pro W5500

Place in the ranking	234	502
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	43.22	no data
Power efficiency	13.19	12.99
Architecture	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	Navi 14	GM107
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	10 February 2020 (4 years ago)	11 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	no data

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	1408	640
Core clock speed	1187 MHz	1093 MHz
Boost clock speed	1400 MHz	1150 MHz
Number of transistors	6,400 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	123.2	43.72
Floating-point processing power	3.942 TFLOPS	1.399 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	88	40

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	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 4.0 x8	MXM-A (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth	224.0 GB/s	80 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	4x DisplayPort	No outputs
Display Port	no data	1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	-	+
3D Stereo	no data	+
Mosaic	no data	+
nView Display Management	no data	+
Optimus	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.5	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	-	5.0

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 W5500 23.65
+182%

Quadro M1200 8.38

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 W5500 9122
+182%

Quadro M1200 3232

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	90−95 +173%	33 −173%
4K	30−35 +173%	11 −173%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.43	no data
4K	13.30	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

+0%

12−14

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 +0%	13 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

+0%

21−24

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Hitman 3	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

+0%

14−16

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

+0%

8−9

+0%

This is how Pro W5500 and Quadro M1200 compete in popular games:

Pro W5500 is 173% faster in 1080p
Pro W5500 is 173% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	23.65	8.38
Recency	10 February 2020	11 January 2017
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	7 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	45 Watt

Pro W5500 has a 182.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro M1200, on the other hand, has 177.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W5500 is a workstation card while Quadro M1200 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.