Quadro T1200 Mobile vs Radeon Pro WX 7100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon Instinct MI6 Radeon Pro Duo Polaris Radeon Pro V7300X Radeon Pro V7350X2 Radeon Pro WX 5100 Radeon Pro WX 7100
VS
Quadro T400 Mobile Quadro T500 Mobile Quadro T600 Mobile Quadro T1000 Mobile Quadro T1000 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Max-Q Quadro T1200 Mobile Quadro T2000 Mobile Quadro T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 7100 with Quadro T1200 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Pro WX 7100
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 130 Watt
20.29
+4.3%

Pro WX 7100 outperforms T1200 Mobile by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
T1200 Mobile Quadro T1200

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking282300
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.63no data
Power efficiency10.6974.12
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameEllesmereTU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date10 November 2016 (8 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores23041024
Core clock speed1188 MHz855 MHz
Boost clock speed1243 MHz1425 MHz
Number of transistors5,700 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate179.091.20
Floating-point processing power5.728 TFLOPS2.918 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs14464

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.6
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 HD60−65
+3.4%
58
−3.4%
1440p30−35
−10%
33
+10%
4K80−85
−1.3%
81
+1.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p13.32no data
1440p26.63no data
4K9.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−1.6%
65
+1.6%
Fortnite 100−110
+3.1%
95−100
−3.1%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+2.7%
75−80
−2.7%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+3.9%
50−55
−3.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+4.3%
65−70
−4.3%
Valorant 140−150
+2.2%
130−140
−2.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+2.2%
220−230
−2.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%
Dota 2 100−110
−5.6%
114
+5.6%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+8.5%
59
−8.5%
Fortnite 100−110
+3.1%
95−100
−3.1%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+2.7%
75−80
−2.7%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+3.9%
50−55
−3.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+0%
71
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+5.1%
35−40
−5.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+4.3%
65−70
−4.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−31.5%
71
+31.5%
Valorant 140−150
+2.2%
130−140
−2.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+3.9%
75−80
−3.9%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%
Dota 2 100−110
+0.9%
107
−0.9%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+14.3%
56
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+2.7%
75−80
−2.7%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+6%
50−55
−6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+4.3%
65−70
−4.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+45.9%
37
−45.9%
Valorant 140−150
+9.2%
130−140
−9.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
+3.1%
95−100
−3.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+3.8%
130−140
−3.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−12.1%
37
+12.1%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+7.5%
160−170
−7.5%
Valorant 170−180
+2.3%
170−180
−2.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+3.8%
50−55
−3.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+4.9%
41
−4.9%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+4.8%
40−45
−4.8%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%
Valorant 100−110
+4.9%
100−110
−4.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Dota 2 65−70
−67.7%
109
+67.7%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3.1%
30−35
−3.1%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

1440p
High Preset

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

This is how Pro WX 7100 and T1200 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 7100 is 3% faster in 1080p
  • T1200 Mobile is 10% faster in 1440p
  • T1200 Mobile is 1% 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 WX 7100 is 46% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T1200 Mobile is 68% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro WX 7100 is ahead in 37 tests (82%)
  • T1200 Mobile is ahead in 5 tests (11%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 20.29 19.46
Recency 10 November 2016 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 18 Watt

Pro WX 7100 has a 4.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T1200 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 622.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro WX 7100 and Quadro T1200 Mobile.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 7100 is a workstation card while Quadro T1200 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 WX 7100
Radeon Pro WX 7100
NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
Quadro T1200
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Pro WX 7100 Radeon Pro WX 7100
vs
FirePro W9100 FirePro W9100
T1200 Mobile Quadro T1200 Mobile
vs
Pro 580X Radeon Pro 580X
Pro WX 7100 Radeon Pro WX 7100
vs
Tesla M60 Tesla M60
Iris Xe Graphics MAX Intel Iris Xe Graphics MAX
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
RTX A4000 NVIDIA RTX A4000
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
RX 6600 XT AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
RX 6600 AMD Radeon RX 6600
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
RTX A3000 Mobile NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
T600 NVIDIA T600
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
Pro W6800 AMD Radeon Pro W6800
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
Pro W6600 AMD Radeon Pro W6600
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
RTX A2000 Mobile NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100
RTX A2000 NVIDIA RTX A2000
vs
Pro WX 7100 Pro WX 7100

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.9 58 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 7100 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 WX 7100 or Quadro T1200 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.