GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon 880M and NVIDIA Quadro K1200 represent two vastly different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive generational divide. The 880M, a modern integrated processor from 2024, utterly dominates the 2015-era professional Quadro in every measured test, with the only question being the magnitude of the victory. The data shows a clean sweep: the Radeon 880M wins both head-to-head benchmarks, with the Quadro K1200 failing to secure a single win across the available tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon 880M scores 40,006 points against the Quadro K1200's 7,698. This translates to a 419.7% advantage for the AMD part, a staggering gap that underscores the architectural leap between the two. The 880M's Vulkan performance is not merely better; it is in a different performance class entirely, outpacing the NVIDIA card by a factor of more than five. This result indicates that the Radeon's modern RDNA 3.5 architecture is far more efficient at translating its compute resources into actual frame throughput in Vulkan-based workloads.

The Geekbench OpenCL test tells a similar story, though with a slightly narrower margin. The Radeon 880M scores 31,285, while the Quadro K1200 manages 8,831. The 254.3% delta in favor of AMD shows that even in a more general-purpose compute API, the 880M holds a massive lead. This is particularly notable because OpenCL is often used in professional and scientific applications, the Quadro's traditional stomping ground. The data suggests that the 880M would not just compete with the K1200 in such tasks but would leave it far behind.

Looking beyond the direct head-to-head, the overall average benchmark scores reinforce the trend. The Radeon 880M posts an average score of 8,436 across all its benchmark entries, while the Quadro K1200 averages 8,265. While this aggregate difference is small (around 2%), it is important to note that the 880M's average includes several legacy DirectX tests where it scores surprisingly low (e.g., 31 in Passmark DirectX 10 and 32 in DirectX 12). In contrast, the Quadro's average is based solely on its two Geekbench results. The 880M's true compute potential is better represented by its Geekbench scores, which are the only points of direct comparison.

The nearest-rival data further contextualizes the 880M's position. Its average score of 8,436 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427) and 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8,325). This shows that while the 880M is a strong performer, it sits in a specific performance tier. The Quadro K1200, with its average of 8,265, is 1.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8,135) and 0.7% behind the R9 M375X, indicating it is in a similar, though slightly lower, performance bracket.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast and explains the benchmark results. The AMD Radeon 880M is built on a 4 nm TSMC process and uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, featuring 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 145.9 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 uses the older Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm process, with a mere 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, yielding a density of just 12.6 million per square millimeter. The 880M packs over 18 times the transistor count into a die that is only 1.6 times larger, a testament to the manufacturing advancements over the decade separating them.

Core configurations also differ significantly. The Radeon 880M features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines, alongside 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro K1200, by contrast, has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. Its API support is more limited, offering DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 880M's higher shader count and modern feature set give it a fundamental compute advantage.

Memory architecture is another key differentiator. The Quadro K1200 uses a dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 880M, as an integrated processor, relies on system memory, with its bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This means the 880M's memory performance varies with the host system's RAM, but its Geekbench scores suggest it is not a bottleneck in these tests. Clock speeds also favor the AMD part, with a boost clock of 2900 MHz compared to the Quadro's 1033 MHz.

The physical and power profiles differ as well. The 880M is an IGP with a 15 W TDP and no power connectors, while the Quadro K1200 is a single-slot card with a 45 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The NVIDIA card measures 160 mm in length and 69 mm in height, featuring four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The AMD part's display outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its integration into mobile platforms.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the available data, the AMD Radeon 880M wins in every scenario where a benchmark exists. Its two head-to-head victories are comprehensive, and its architectural advantages point to clear strengths in modern workloads. The 880M is the obvious choice for anything involving Vulkan, where its 419.7% lead over the K1200 demonstrates exceptional driver optimization and hardware efficiency. Its OpenCL performance, with a 254.3% advantage, makes it the superior option for compute tasks, including scientific simulations or rendering workloads that leverage this API.

The Quadro K1200's potential wins are not visible in the provided benchmarks. Its only score categories are Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, both of which it loses decisively. However, its dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth could theoretically provide an advantage in memory-bound tasks that do not rely on the system RAM used by the 880M. Additionally, its 45 W TDP and single-slot design make it a self-contained solution for older systems, whereas the 880M requires a compatible modern platform.

The 880M's Passmark scores, while low in legacy DirectX tests (97 in DirectX 9, 73 in DirectX 11, 31 in DirectX 10, and 32 in DirectX 12), still show a strong overall Passmark G3D score of 7,615. The Quadro has no equivalent scores to compare, so it is unclear if it would win in these older API tests. Given its Maxwell architecture, it might hold its own in DirectX 11 workloads, but this is speculative without direct data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M has a higher average benchmark score of 8,436, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro K1200's 8,265.

Q: How much faster is the Radeon 880M in Vulkan?

A: The Radeon 880M scores 40,006 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 419.7% higher than the Quadro K1200's 7,698.

Q: Does the Quadro K1200 win any head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No, the data shows the Quadro K1200 wins zero head-to-head benchmarks against the Radeon 880M.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Radeon 880M has 34,000 million transistors, while the Quadro K1200 has 1,870 million transistors.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M has a TDP of 15 W, whereas the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 has a TDP of 45 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Radeon 880M boosts to 2900 MHz, significantly higher than the Quadro K1200's boost of 1033 MHz.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 880M is the superior GPU in every measurable way. Its 254.3% lead in OpenCL and 419.7% lead in Vulkan over the Quadro K1200 are not marginal improvements but generational leaps. The 880M's modern 4 nm process, RDNA 3.5 architecture, and 768 shading units provide a compute foundation that the older Maxwell-based K1200 cannot match. Anyone choosing between these two for a new system or upgrade should select the Radeon 880M without hesitation, as it offers dramatically better performance across both compute APIs tested.

The NVIDIA Quadro K1200, however, is not without a niche. As an end-of-life product with a 45 W TDP and a single-slot form factor, it remains a functional option for legacy systems that require a discrete GPU with dedicated memory. Its 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer and 80.19 GB/s bandwidth could be sufficient for basic professional tasks or as a display output solution for older workstations. Furthermore, its nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 980, which it trails by only 1.2%, suggesting it is still competitive within its own performance tier from a decade ago.

Ultimately, the Radeon 880M is the clear winner for any modern workload. The Quadro K1200 should only be considered if the user is constrained to a legacy platform that cannot support the 880M's integrated design. The benchmark results, with the 880M winning 2-0 and posting triple-digit percentage deltas, leave no room for debate: the Radeon 880M is the definitive choice for performance.