M1200 vs M2000 [4 |
您所在的位置：网站首页 › m2000m m1200m › M1200 vs M2000 [4 |
|
Quadro M1200 vs M2000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro M2000 with Quadro M1200, including specs and performance data. Quadro M200020164 GB 128-bit, 75 Watt 10.32 +23.3% Quadro M120020174 GB GDDR5, 45 Watt 8.37 GTX 1650 GTX 1060 6 GB RTX 3060 RTX 4060 RTX 4070 SUPER RTX 4080 SUPER RTX 4090 RX 580 RX 5700 Arc A580 RX 7600 XT RX 7800 XT RX 7900 XTXM2000 outperforms M1200 by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results. Contents Primary details Cost-effectiveness evaluation Detailed specifications Form factor & compatibility VRAM capacity and type Connectivity and outputs Supported technologies API compatibility Performance benchmarks In-game performance breakdown Pros & cons summary Vote for your favorite Comparisons with similar GPUs Community ratings Questions & comments Quadro M2000 Quadro M1200 Primary detailsGPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared. Place in performance ranking407474Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.310.89ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)Maxwell (2014−2018)GPU code nameGM206N17P-Q1Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstationRelease date8 April 2016 (8 years ago)13 January 2017 (7 years ago)Launch price (MSRP)$437.75 no dataCurrent price$285 (0.7x MSRP)$1372 Cost-effectiveness evaluationPerformance to price ratio. The higher, the better. Quadro M2000 has 384% better value for money than Quadro M1200. Detailed specificationsGeneral performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked. Pipelines / CUDA cores768640Core clock speed796 MHz991 MHzBoost clock speed1163 MHz1150 MHzNumber of transistors2,940 million1870 MillionManufacturing process technology28 nm28 nmPower consumption (TDP)75 Watt45 WattTexture fill rate55.8243.72Floating-point performance1,812 gflopsno data Form factor & compatibilityInformation on Quadro M2000 and Quadro M1200 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard. Laptop sizeno datalargeInterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)Length201 mmno dataWidth1" (2.5 cm)no dataSupplementary power connectorsNoneNone VRAM capacity and typeParameters 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 type128 BitGDDR5Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GBMemory bus width128 Bit128 BitMemory clock speed6612 MHz5000 MHzMemory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/s80 GB/sShared memoryno data- Connectivity and outputsTypes 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 ConnectorsDP DP DP DPNo outputsNumber of simultaneous displays4no dataDisplay Portno data1.2 Supported technologiesSupported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes. Optimusno data+3D Vision Pro+no data3D Stereono data+Mosaic++nView Display Managementno data+nView Desktop Management+no dataOptimusno data+ API compatibilityList of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions. DirectX1212Shader Model55.0OpenGL4.54.5OpenCL1.21.2Vulkan+1.1.126CUDA5.25.0 Synthetic benchmark performanceNon-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale. Combined synthetic benchmark scoreThis is our combined benchmark performance 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. Quadro M2000 10.32 +23.3% Quadro M1200 8.37M2000 outperforms M1200 by 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results. PassmarkThis is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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. Benchmark coverage: 25% Quadro M2000 3985 +23.3% Quadro M1200 3233M2000 outperforms M1200 by 23% in Passmark. GeekBench 5 OpenCLGeekbench 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. Benchmark coverage: 9% Quadro M2000 14087 +45% Quadro M1200 9712M2000 outperforms M1200 by 45% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL. GeekBench 5 VulkanGeekbench 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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group. Benchmark coverage: 5% Quadro M2000 14049 +48.3% Quadro M1200 9471M2000 outperforms M1200 by 48% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan. GeekBench 5 CUDAGeekbench 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 CUDA API by NVIDIA. Benchmark coverage: 4% Quadro M2000 13100 +27.2% Quadro M1200 10296M2000 outperforms M1200 by 27% in GeekBench 5 CUDA. Gaming performanceLet's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS. Average FPS across all PC gamesHere are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions: Full HD35−40 +20.7% 29 −20.7% 4K14−16 +16.7% 12 −16.7% FPS performance in popular gamesFull HDLow Preset Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 +30% 10−11 −30%Full HDMedium Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 +41.7% 12−14 −41.7% Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 +37.5% 8−9 −37.5% Battlefield 5 24−27 +38.9% 18−20 −38.9% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18 +41.7% 12−14 −41.7% Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 +30% 10−11 −30% Far Cry 5 18−20 +35.7% 14−16 −35.7% Far Cry New Dawn 21−24 +27.8% 18−20 −27.8% Forza Horizon 4 40−45 +36.7% 30−33 −36.7% Hitman 3 16−18 +33.3% 12−14 −33.3% Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 +23.3% 30−33 −23.3% Metro Exodus 24−27 +33.3% 18−20 −33.3% Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 +27.8% 18−20 −27.8% Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 +23.8% 21−24 −23.8% Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 +29.2% 24−27 −29.2%Full HDHigh Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 +41.7% 12−14 −41.7% Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 +37.5% 8−9 −37.5% Battlefield 5 24−27 +38.9% 18−20 −38.9% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18 +41.7% 12−14 −41.7% Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 +30% 10−11 −30% Far Cry 5 18−20 +35.7% 14−16 −35.7% Far Cry New Dawn 21−24 +27.8% 18−20 −27.8% Forza Horizon 4 40−45 +36.7% 30−33 −36.7% Hitman 3 16−18 +33.3% 12−14 −33.3% Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 +23.3% 30−33 −23.3% Metro Exodus 24−27 +33.3% 18−20 −33.3% Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 +27.8% 18−20 −27.8% Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 +23.8% 21−24 −23.8% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28 +33.3% 21−24 −33.3% Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 +29.2% 24−27 −29.2%Full HDUltra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 +41.7% 12−14 −41.7% Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 +37.5% 8−9 −37.5% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18 +41.7% 12−14 −41.7% Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 +30% 10−11 −30% Far Cry 5 18−20 +35.7% 14−16 −35.7% Forza Horizon 4 40−45 +36.7% 30−33 −36.7% Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 +23.3% 30−33 −23.3% Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 +23.8% 21−24 −23.8% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13 +30% 10−11 −30% Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 +29.2% 24−27 −29.2%Full HDEpic Preset Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 +27.8% 18−20 −27.8%1440pHigh Preset Battlefield 5 16−18 +33.3% 12−14 −33.3% Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 +30% 10−11 −30%1440pUltra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 +33.3% 6−7 −33.3% Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 +25% 8−9 −25% Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Far Cry 5 12−14 +30% 10−11 −30% Forza Horizon 4 14−16 +25% 12−14 −25% Hitman 3 12−14 +33.3% 9−10 −33.3% Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20 +28.6% 14−16 −28.6% Metro Exodus 10−12 +37.5% 8−9 −37.5% Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10 +28.6% 7−8 −28.6% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 +33.3% 6−7 −33.3% Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3%1440pEpic Preset Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 +40% 10−11 −40%4KHigh Preset Battlefield 5 7−8 +40% 5−6 −40% Far Cry New Dawn 6−7 +50% 4−5 −50% Hitman 3 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10 +28.6% 7−8 −28.6% Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 +25% 4−5 −25%4KUltra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 +25% 4−5 −25% Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1 Far Cry 5 4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Forza Horizon 4 10−11 +25% 8−9 −25% Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10 +28.6% 7−8 −28.6% Metro Exodus 9−10 +28.6% 7−8 −28.6% Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 +50% 2−3 −50%4KEpic Preset Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9 +33.3% 6−7 −33.3%This is how Quadro M2000 and Quadro M1200 compete in popular games: Quadro M2000 is 21% faster in 1080pQuadro M2000 is 17% faster in 4K Pros & cons summary Performance score 10.32 8.37 Recency 8 April 2016 13 January 2017 Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 45 WattThe Quadro M2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1200 in performance tests. Be aware that Quadro M2000 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. Vote for your favoriteDo you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card. Quadro M2000 Quadro M1200 Like Like Comparisons with similar GPUsWe selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider. Quadro M2000 vs Quadro K5000 Quadro M1200 vs Tesla K40m Quadro M2000 vs FirePro D300 Quadro M2000 vs GeForce GTX 770M SLI Quadro M2000 vs FirePro W2100 Quadro M2000 vs FirePro W4100 Quadro M2000 vs Radeon R7 250 Quadro M2000 vs Quadro M620 Quadro M2000 vs Radeon HD 5770 Quadro M2000 vs Quadro M520 Quadro M2000 vs GeForce GTS 450 Community ratingsHere you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself. 3.8 195 votesRate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5: 3.4 288 votesRate Quadro M1200 on a scale of 1 to 5: Questions & commentsHere you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch. Graphics settings Screen resolution FPS |
| CopyRight 2018-2019 办公设备维修网 版权所有 豫ICP备15022753号-3 |