AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 and NVIDIA Quadro K1200 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• Around 8% higher boost clock speed: 1219 MHz vs 1124 MHz
• Around 8% higher texture fill rate: 39.01 GTexel / s vs 35.97 GTexel / s
• Around 8% better floating-point performance: 1,248 gflops vs 1,151 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 5000 MHz
• Around 17% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10229 vs 8709
• Around 85% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 46.988 vs 25.411
• Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.235 vs 117.722
• 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3709 vs 1721
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 3288
• 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3709 vs 1721
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 3288

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K1200

• Around 14% higher core clock speed: 1058 MHz vs 925 MHz
• Around 44% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 65 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2924 vs 1832
• Around 44% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 579 vs 402
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 31.949 vs 30.848
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 466.139 vs 438.581
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.629 vs 2.268
• Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4080 vs 3241
• Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4080 vs 3241

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K1200

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1832 2924
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	402 579
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	10229 8709
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.848 31.949
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	438.581 466.139
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.268 2.629
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	46.988 25.411
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.235 117.722
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 4080
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 1721
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 3288
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 4080
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 1721
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 3288

Compare specifications (specs)