OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA Quadro T1200 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£130VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):18 W

NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

6.4/10

Overall score

Score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

40%

4.6

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 83% of graphics cards
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 54%
4.6

Technical score

Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

44%

3.0

Performance

24%

2.4

Memory

12%

9.4

Power

11%

7.6

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 89%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £130
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA Quadro T1200

Technical score
Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

44%

3.0

Performance

24%

2.4

Memory

12%

9.4

Power

11%

7.6

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

8.3

Connectivity

4.6
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
3,775 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 3,775 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 91.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,492 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,492 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 91.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
3,104 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 3,104 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 89.7% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
3.7 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 3.7 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 90.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
192 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 192 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 87.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
12,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 12,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.8% of graphics cards and equal to 13.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
17.28 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 17.28 Gbps, which is slower than on 57.7% of graphics cards and equal to 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
18 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 18 W, which is lower than that of 99.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
95 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 95 W under peak load, which is lower than 90.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
200 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 200 W PSU, which is lower than that of 99.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
70 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 70 W, which is lower than that of 94.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
?
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA Quadro T1200 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 91.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (18 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    18 W vs 215 W
  • 69.2% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (200 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    200 W vs 650 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 68.2% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (70 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    70 W vs 220 W
  • 18 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (77 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    77 °C vs 95 °C
  • 4x cheaper
    NVIDIA Quadro T1200 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £520).
    £130 vs £520
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 4x cheaper
    NVIDIA Quadro T1200 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £520).
    £130 vs £520
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 91.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (18 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    18 W vs 215 W
  • 69.2% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (200 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    200 W vs 650 W
  • 68.2% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (70 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    70 W vs 220 W
  • 18 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (77 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    77 °C vs 95 °C
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 28.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 24 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (16 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    16 vs 40
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • 69.8% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (114.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    114.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 28.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,785 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 24 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (16 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    16 vs 40
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • 69.8% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (114.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    114.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 64.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (57.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    57.12 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 83.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    3.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 21.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,515 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,515 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 80 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (64 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    64 vs 144
  • 71.3% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6,492 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    6,492 points vs 22,638 points
  • 74.5% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (3,775 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    3,775 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2021 vs 2023).
    April 2021
    2021 vs 2023
  • 74.3% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (3,104 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    3,104 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 75.2% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (7.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    7.31 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 77.1% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.11 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,328 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,024 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,024 vs 4,352
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 57.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (192 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    192 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 36.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 95.8% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (1 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    1 MB vs 24 MB
  • 14.3% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • 79.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (4,700 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    4,700 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (2 vs 3.1).
    2 vs 3.1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2 vs 2.1a).
    2.0 vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    4 vs 6
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 9.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (45 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    45 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA Quadro T1200

  • Certified ISV drivers ensure stability and performance in professional CAD and 3D software like SolidWorks and AutoCAD.
  • Efficient power consumption (35-95W TGP) makes it suitable for thin and light mobile workstations.
  • Solid 1080p performance for light to medium gaming, often compared to the consumer GTX 1650 Ti.
  • Features 1024 CUDA cores and GDDR6 memory, offering a significant upgrade over previous Pascal-based Quadro models.
  • Supports modern connectivity standards including DisplayPort 1.4 and HDMI 2.1.

What customers don't like about NVIDIA Quadro T1200

  • Limited 4GB VRAM often becomes a bottleneck in modern games and high-resolution video editing.
  • Lacks dedicated Ray Tracing (RT) and Tensor cores found in higher-end RTX Quadro cards.
  • Professional certification makes laptops equipped with this GPU more expensive than gaming equivalents.
  • Struggles with heavy rendering tasks and large assemblies compared to newer Ampere or Ada Lovelace GPUs.
  • Performance is heavily dependent on the laptop manufacturer's specific power limit (TGP) settings.

Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro T1200 is a professional mobile graphics card based on the Turing TU117 architecture, featuring 1024 CUDA cores, 4GB of GDDR6 memory, and a 128-bit memory bus. Built on a 12nm process, it operates with a base clock around 855 MHz and a boost clock reaching up to 1425 MHz, delivering a peak performance of approximately 3.7 TFLOPS. Its main advantages include high power efficiency with a TGP ranging from 35W to 95W and ISV certifications that ensure stability for CAD and professional design software like SolidWorks or AutoCAD. However, it lacks dedicated Ray Tracing and Tensor cores found in RTX models, and its 4GB VRAM can be a significant bottleneck for modern high-resolution video editing or complex 3D rendering tasks.

Compare NVIDIA Quadro T1200 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA Quadro T1200 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found