AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X and NVIDIA Quadro K1200 are both end-of-life mobile and workstation graphics solutions, respectively, built on the same 28 nm TSMC process node. The data available for direct comparison is limited to a single OpenCL benchmark, where the AMD part edges out a narrow victory, but the architectural and specification sheets reveal deeper divergences that matter for specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8851 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 scores 8831 points. This gives the AMD card a win with a marginal delta of 0.2 percent. The performance difference is effectively negligible, placing both GPUs within the same performance tier.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the Radeon R9 M265X’s average benchmark score is 8851, which places it at the 44th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (average score 8863, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon 550X (8918, -0.8%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746, 1.2%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (8743, 1.2%). The data shows the R9 M265X is essentially tied with the Pro WX 5100 and slightly behind the 550X, while it holds a small 1.2 percent lead over the RTX 3050 A Mobile and the GTX 460 v2.

The Quadro K1200’s average benchmark score is 8265, which places it at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs — one percentile point lower than the AMD part. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (average score 8325, delta -0.7%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (8167, 1.2%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8135, 1.6%), and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8129, 1.7%). The K1200 trails the R9 M375X by 0.7 percent but leads the GTX 980, GTX 950M, and R9 M360 by 1.2 to 1.7 percent. Notably, the Quadro also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 7698, a test for which the Radeon has no reported score.

Interpreting the single head-to-head result, the 0.2 percent delta in OpenCL is within run-to-run variance and does not indicate a meaningful performance advantage for either card. The average benchmark scores, however, tell a slightly different story: the R9 M265X holds a 7.1 percent lead over the K1200 when comparing their respective averages (8851 vs 8265). This suggests that across a wider range of tests, the AMD card may perform better, but the available data does not include additional shared tests to confirm this.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X uses the Venus chip with a GCN 1.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 uses the GM107 chip with a Maxwell architecture. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the transistor counts and die sizes differ.

The AMD chip contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.2 million transistors per mm². The NVIDIA chip is larger and denser: 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a density of 12.6 million transistors per mm². The Maxwell architecture in the K1200 is more transistor-efficient per unit area, though the R9 M265X’s GCN design compensates with a higher raw compute unit count.

The R9 M265X packs 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operation units (ROPs). The K1200 has fewer shading units (512) and TMUs (32), but the same number of ROPs (16). This gives the AMD card a theoretical advantage in raw shader throughput, but the NVIDIA card compensates with higher clock speeds.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The R9 M265X runs at a base clock of 575 MHz with a boost of 625 MHz, while the K1200 runs at a base of 954 MHz and boosts to 1033 MHz. The NVIDIA card’s clocks are roughly 65 percent higher at base and 65 percent higher at boost, which explains how it achieves competitive performance despite having fewer cores. The memory clocks also differ: the R9 M265X uses 1000 MHz memory (4 Gbps effective), while the K1200 uses 1253 MHz memory (5 Gbps effective).

The memory subsystems differ in capacity but not bus width. The R9 M265X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The K1200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth — a 25 percent increase in bandwidth. Both cards support DirectX 12, but the R9 M265X supports DirectX 12 (11_1) while the K1200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, and the Vulkan versions differ: the R9 M265X supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the K1200 supports Vulkan 1.4.

The K1200 has a fully specified power profile: a TDP of 45 W, a single-slot design, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. Its dimensions are 160 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The R9 M265X lacks this data in the pack, with no TDP, slot width, or dimensions listed. The K1200 also lists four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the R9 M265X has no display output information.

The Verdict

The data shows that the AMD Radeon R9 M265X wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark, but the margin is negligible at 0.2 percent. The R9 M265X also holds a higher average benchmark score (8851 vs 8265, a 7.1 percent gap) and a higher percentile ranking (44 vs 43). However, the K1200 counters with a higher memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB), higher memory bandwidth (80.19 GB/s vs 64.00 GB/s), and significantly higher clock speeds.

For users prioritizing raw OpenCL performance, the R9 M265X is the nominal winner, but the delta is so small that it is unlikely to be perceptible in real-world tasks. For users who need more memory capacity for larger datasets or who benefit from higher memory bandwidth, the K1200 is the better choice based on the specification data. The K1200 also has a Vulkan score (7698) that the R9 M265X does not have, suggesting it can handle Vulkan workloads, while the AMD card’s Vulkan support (version 1.2.170) is older than the K1200’s (version 1.4).

The R9 M265X has a higher pixel rate (10.00 GPixel/s vs 16.53 GPixel/s) and texture rate (25.00 GTexel/s vs 33.06 GTexel/s) are actually lower than the K1200’s rates. The K1200’s pixel rate is 65 percent higher and its texture rate is 32 percent higher. The R9 M265X does have a higher FP32 compute rate (800.0 GFLOPS vs 1,057.8 GFLOPS for the K1200), but the K1200’s FP32 is actually higher. The data shows the K1200 has a 32 percent advantage in FP32 throughput.

Given the data, the K1200 is the stronger overall performer on paper, with higher clocks, higher bandwidth, more memory, and higher fill rates. The R9 M265X wins the single benchmark but lacks the broader specification advantages. The verdict is that the K1200 is better for compute-heavy tasks and larger workloads, while the R9 M265X is adequate for lighter duties where its slightly higher OpenCL score might matter.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M265X wins with a score of 8851 against the NVIDIA Quadro K1200’s 8831, a delta of 0.2 percent.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The R9 M265X has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the K1200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, both on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The R9 M265X runs at 575 MHz base and 625 MHz boost, while the K1200 runs at 954 MHz base and 1033 MHz boost.

Q: Does the Quadro K1200 have a Vulkan benchmark score?

A: Yes, the K1200 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 7698, but the R9 M265X has no reported Vulkan score.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K1200 has a higher memory bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s, compared to the R9 M265X’s 64.00 GB/s.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The R9 M265X has 1,500 million transistors, while the K1200 has 1,870 million transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X wins in the single OpenCL benchmark, holding a 0.2 percent advantage over the K1200. It also has a higher average benchmark score (8851 vs 8265) and a higher percentile rank (44 vs 43). This suggests it may perform slightly better in mixed workloads that rely on OpenCL acceleration.

The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 wins in several specification categories. It has twice the memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB), 25 percent higher memory bandwidth (80.19 GB/s vs 64.00 GB/s), and significantly higher clock speeds (954 MHz base vs 575 MHz base). It also has higher pixel and texture rates (16.53 GPixel/s vs 10.00 GPixel/s, and 33.06 GTexel/s vs 25.00 GTexel/s). The K1200’s FP32 performance is higher at 1,057.8 GFLOPS vs 800.0 GFLOPS. Additionally, the K1200 has a Vulkan score of 7698, which the R9 M265X lacks entirely.

The K1200 also has a defined power envelope (45 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors) and a specified form factor (160 mm length), while the R9 M265X has no such data. The K1200’s four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs are also listed, while the R9 M265X has no display output specification.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M265X | NVIDIA Quadro K1200 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Chip | Venus | GM107 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 575 MHz | 954 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 625 MHz | 1033 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 512 |

| TMUs | 40 | 32 |

| ROPs | 16 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.00 GPixel/s | 16.53 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 25.00 GTexel/s | 33.06 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 800.0 GFLOPS | 1,057.8 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 45 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 200 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Not listed | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 160 mm (length), 69 mm (height) |

| Release Date | 2014-03-20 | 2015-01-27 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | Quadro Fermi |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Quadro Maxwell |