Quadro M1200 vs Radeon R7 260X
Quadro M1200
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 260X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M1200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R7 260X.
| Insight | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M1200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro M1200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $150), it costs 73% less, resulting in a 276.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+276.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M1200 and Radeon R7 260X
Quadro M1200
The Quadro M1200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1093 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,212 points.
Radeon R7 260X
The Radeon R7 260X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 115W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,198 points. Launch price was $139.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M1200 scores 3,212 and the Radeon R7 260X reaches 3,198 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M1200 is built on Maxwell while the Radeon R7 260X uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Quadro M1200) vs 896 (Radeon R7 260X). Raw compute: 1.399 TFLOPS (Quadro M1200) vs 1.971 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260X). Boost clocks: 1150 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,212 | 3,198 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 896+40% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.399 TFLOPS | 1.971 TFLOPS+41% |
| Boost Clock | 1150 MHz+15% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 56+40% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+43% | 224 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro M1200 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 260X has 2 GB. The Quadro M1200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro M1200) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon R7 260X) — the Quadro M1200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro M1200) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R7 260X). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.2+9% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M1200) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R7 260X). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,VP8 (Quadro M1200) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R7 260X).
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,VP8 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M1200 draws 45W versus the Radeon R7 260X's 115W — a 87.5% difference. The Quadro M1200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M1200) vs 500W (Radeon R7 260X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 82°C vs 80.
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 45W-61% | 115W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 170mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 82°C | 80-2% |
| Perf/Watt | 71.4+157% | 27.8 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M1200 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Radeon R7 260X launched at $139 and now averages $150. The Quadro M1200 costs 73.3% less ($110 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 80.3 (Quadro M1200) vs 21.3 (Radeon R7 260X) — the Quadro M1200 offers 277% better value. The Quadro M1200 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro M1200 | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $139 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-73% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 80.3+277% | 21.3 |
| Codename | GM107 | Bonaire |
| Release | January 11 2017 | October 8 2013 |
| Ranking | #567 | #568 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro M1200 and Radeon R7 260X
