NVIDIA Quadro K1200 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K1200 and NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm 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 NVIDIA Quadro K1200

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 45% higher core clock speed: 1058 MHz vs 732 MHz
• 5.2x lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 235 Watt
• Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2943 vs 2918
• 3.4x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 579 vs 172
• Around 67% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1721 vs 1032
• Around 67% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1721 vs 1032

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm

• 4.6x more texture fill rate: 164.0 GTexel / s vs 35.97 GTexel / s
• 5.3x more pipelines: 2688 vs 512
• 3.4x better floating-point performance: 3,935 gflops vs 1,151 gflops
• Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 4% higher memory clock speed: 5200 MHz vs 5000 MHz
• Around 94% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 17075 vs 8818
• Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 49.455 vs 31.949
• 3.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1666.354 vs 466.139
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.836 vs 2.629
• 3.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 92.472 vs 25.411
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 275.229 vs 117.722
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7038 vs 3288
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7038 vs 3288

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K1200
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2943 2918
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	579 172
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	8818 17075
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	31.949 49.455
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	466.139 1666.354
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.629 5.836
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	25.411 92.472
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	117.722 275.229
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1721 1032
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3288 7038
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1721 1032
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3288 7038

Compare specifications (specs)