NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one directly comparable benchmark between these two GPUs, and the result is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 scores 8831 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6946 points. This represents a 27.1% advantage for the Quadro K1200 in raw compute throughput. The delta is substantial, not marginal: the Quadro K1200 outperforms the older GeForce part by nearly three-tenths of its own score.

Looking at the wider picture, the Quadro K1200's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 8265 points, which places it at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The GeForce GTX 675M, by contrast, has an average score of 6946 points and sits at the 39th percentile. The gap in percentile ranking is narrow, but the gap in raw numbers is clear. The Quadro K1200 also has a second benchmark result, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 7698, which the GTX 675M cannot match because it lacks a Vulkan entry in the database.

The head-to-head data is one-sided: the Quadro K1200 wins 1 benchmark, the GTX 675M wins 0. There is no recorded test where the older Fermi-based part pulls ahead. The closest comparison among the Quadro K1200's nearest rivals is the AMD Radeon R9 M375X, which scores 8325 on average, a 0.7% difference from the Quadro's 8265. The Quadro K1200 also leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 by 1.2% (8167), the GeForce GTX 950M by 1.6% (8135), and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 by 1.7% (8129). These are small margins, indicating that the Quadro K1200 sits in a tightly packed performance band.

For the GeForce GTX 675M, its nearest rivals cluster around its 6946 average. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975, a 0.4% difference, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 7023, a 1.1% lead over the GTX 675M. The NVIDIA T600 scores 7035, a 1.3% advantage, and the AMD FirePro M5100 trails at 6830, which is 1.7% behind. The GTX 675M is therefore not an outlier in either direction among its immediate peers; it is a mid-pack performer in its own generation cohort.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for compute-oriented workloads. The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 leads the GeForce GTX 675M by 27.1% in the only shared benchmark, and it has a higher average score across all recorded tests. The Quadro K1200 also offers a Vulkan benchmark result, which the GTX 675M does not have, indicating broader API support in the database. For any task that relies on OpenCL compute, the Quadro K1200 is the stronger part.

The GeForce GTX 675M, however, is not without its own context. It was released earlier, and its transistor count is slightly higher at 1,950 million versus 1,870 million for the Quadro K1200. The GTX 675M also has a wider memory bus at 256 bit versus 128 bit, and higher memory bandwidth at 96.00 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s. These memory advantages do not translate into a compute win in the recorded data, but they may matter for bandwidth-sensitive tasks that the benchmarks do not capture.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the benchmark data, the Quadro K1200 is the pick for anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads. The 27.1% delta in the head-to-head test is too large to ignore. The GTX 675M is the pick only if the wider memory bus and higher bandwidth are critical, and if the lower compute score is acceptable. The database does not record any test where the GTX 675M wins, so the evidence favors the Quadro K1200 without qualification.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 wins in every recorded benchmark category. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 8831 against 6946 for the GTX 675M. The Quadro K1200 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 7698, a test that the GTX 675M does not have in the database. This means the Quadro K1200 has a measurable advantage in both compute APIs that are recorded.

The GeForce GTX 675M does not win any recorded benchmark. Its only entry, Geekbench OpenCL, is 6946, which is 27.1% below the Quadro K1200. However, the GTX 675M does have structural advantages that the benchmarks may not fully reflect. Its memory bandwidth is 96.00 GB/s, which is 19.8% higher than the Quadro K1200's 80.19 GB/s. Its texture rate is 39.68 GTexel/s, which is 20.0% higher than the Quadro K1200's 33.06 GTexel/s. The GTX 675M also has double the TMUs (64 versus 32) and double the ROPs (32 versus 16). These specifications suggest that the GTX 675M could be faster in fill-rate-bound scenarios, even though the recorded benchmarks do not show it.

The Quadro K1200 counters with a much higher pixel rate: 16.53 GPixel/s versus 9.920 GPixel/s for the GTX 675M. The Quadro K1200 also has more shading units (512 versus 384) and a higher FP32 throughput at 1,057.8 GFLOPS versus 952.3 GFLOPS. The compute advantage is therefore not just in the benchmark scores; it is rooted in the architecture's raw capabilities.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 has an average score of 8265 across all recorded tests, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M has an average score of 6946. The Quadro K1200 also ranks higher in the percentile distribution at 43 versus 39.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro K1200 scores 8831 and the GTX 675M scores 6946. The Quadro K1200 leads by 27.1%.

Q: Does the GeForce GTX 675M have any memory advantage?

A: Yes. The GTX 675M has a 256 bit memory bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the Quadro K1200's 128 bit bus and 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 675M also has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the Quadro K1200 has 4 GB.

Q: What API support differences are recorded?

A: The Quadro K1200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 675M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan entry in the database. The Quadro K1200 has a recorded Vulkan benchmark score of 7698.

Q: Which GPU has higher power consumption?

A: The GeForce GTX 675M has a TDP of 100 W, while the Quadro K1200 has a TDP of 45 W. The Quadro K1200 is the lower-power part by a significant margin.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare for each GPU?

A: The Quadro K1200's closest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M375X, which is 0.7% behind. The GTX 675M's closest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M240, which is 0.4% ahead. The GTX 675M also trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M by 1.1% and the NVIDIA T600 by 1.3%.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The NVIDIA Quadro K1200 uses the GM107 chip, built on the Maxwell architecture, and is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 1,870 million transistors on a die size of 148 mm², giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The GeForce GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip, built on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, and is fabricated on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. It integrates 1,950 million transistors on a die size of 332 mm², giving a transistor density of 5.9 million per mm². The process node difference is stark: 28 nm versus 40 nm, which explains why the Quadro K1200 packs comparable transistor counts into less than half the die area.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Quadro K1200 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 675M has 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro K1200 has more shading units, while the GTX 675M has double the TMUs and ROPs. The clock behavior also differs: the Quadro K1200 has a base clock of 954 MHz and a boost clock of 1033 MHz, while the GTX 675M has no recorded base or boost clock. The memory clock is 1253 MHz for the Quadro K1200 (5 Gbps effective) and 750 MHz for the GTX 675M (3 Gbps effective). The Quadro K1200's memory clock is higher, but the GTX 675M compensates with a wider bus.

Memory configuration is a major divergence. The Quadro K1200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 675M has higher bandwidth but half the capacity. The Quadro K1200's pixel rate is 16.53 GPixel/s, well above the GTX 675M's 9.920 GPixel/s, while the GTX 675M's texture rate of 39.68 GTexel/s exceeds the Quadro K1200's 33.06 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,057.8 GFLOPS for the Quadro K1200 versus 952.3 GFLOPS for the GTX 675M.

Form factor and interface also separate the two. The Quadro K1200 is a single-slot card, 160 mm (6.3 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) high, with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 200 W. It uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface and offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The GTX 675M is an MXM module, using an MXM-B (3.0) interface, with display outputs described as portable device dependent. It has no power connectors listed and no suggested PSU. The TDP difference is notable: 45 W for the Quadro K1200 versus 100 W for the GTX 675M.

The release timeline also differs. The Quadro K1200 was released on 2015-01-27, while the GTX 675M was released on 2012-03-21. The Quadro K1200's predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell. The GTX 675M's predecessor is GeForce 500M and its successor is GeForce 700M. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The Quadro K1200 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 675M has no Vulkan support recorded. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, which is notable given the GTX 675M's older Fermi architecture.