NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M wins both head-to-head tests. It scores 9821 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 8831 for the Quadro K1200, an 11.2% advantage, and 8782 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 7698, a 14.1% advantage.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 850M has an average benchmark score of 9302, placing it in the 46th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro K1200 averages 8265, placing it in the 43rd percentile. That is a difference of roughly 12.5% in average score.

Q: Do both cards use the same chip and architecture?

A: Yes. Both are built on NVIDIA's GM107 chip using the Maxwell architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. They have identical transistor counts of 1,870 million and the same die size of 148 mm².

Q: What memory configurations do they offer?

A: The GTX 850M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth of 32.03 GB/s. The Quadro K1200 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s. The Quadro has both more capacity and substantially higher bandwidth.

Q: Are the shading unit counts different?

A: Yes. The GTX 850M has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Quadro K1200 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 850M has more shaders and TMUs, while both have the same ROP count.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Quadro K1200. Despite having fewer shading units, it achieves 16.53 GPixel/s compared to the GTX 850M's 14.43 GPixel/s. The Quadro also has a slightly higher texture rate at 33.06 GTexel/s versus 36.08 GTexel/s for the GTX 850M, so the GTX 850M actually leads in texture rate.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental architecture: NVIDIA's Maxwell, built on the GM107 chip at TSMC's 28 nm process. The transistor count is identical at 1,870 million, and the die size is the same 148 mm². This means the architectural differences are not about the silicon itself, but about how NVIDIA configured and clocked that silicon for two different market segments.

The GTX 850M is a GeForce 800M-series mobile part. It runs with a memory clock of 1001 MHz, translating to 2 Gbps effective, paired with 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus. Its shading unit count is higher at 640, with 40 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The Quadro K1200 is a workstation-oriented card in the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation, despite using the same Maxwell chip. It has a base clock of 954 MHz and a boost clock of 1033 MHz, while the GTX 850M has no listed base or boost clocks. The Quadro uses 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), which gives it a much wider memory bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s versus 32.03 GB/s. However, the Quadro has fewer shading units (512) and TMUs (32), while keeping the same 16 ROPs.

The bus interface differs too: the GTX 850M uses PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas the Quadro K1200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The GTX 850M is listed as an integrated GPU (IGP) with portable-device-dependent display outputs, reflecting its laptop-oriented design. The Quadro K1200 is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and a 160 mm (6.3 inch) length, 69 mm (2.7 inch) height. Both have the same API support: DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power draw is identical at 45 W TDP, and neither requires external power connectors, though the Quadro lists a suggested PSU of 200 W.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 850M is the clear winner in raw compute benchmarks. Its OpenCL score of 9821 beats the Quadro's 8831 by 11.2%, and its Vulkan score of 8782 beats the Quadro's 7698 by 14.1%. The GTX 850M's higher shading unit count (640 versus 512) and higher texture rate (36.08 GTexel/s versus 33.06 GTexel/s) likely drive this advantage in shader-heavy and texture-heavy workloads. Its FP32 throughput of 1,154.6 GFLOPS also exceeds the Quadro's 1,057.8 GFLOPS. For tasks that rely on general-purpose compute, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the GTX 850M is the stronger option.

The Quadro K1200 wins in memory-related aspects. It has twice the memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB) and more than double the bandwidth (80.19 GB/s versus 32.03 GB/s). This makes it better suited for workloads with large datasets or high memory pressure, such as certain professional visualization tasks. The Quadro also has a higher pixel rate at 16.53 GPixel/s versus 14.43 GPixel/s, despite having fewer shading units. Its base and boost clocks are explicitly specified, which can help with predictable performance in sustained workloads. The Quadro's single-slot form factor and four mini-DisplayPort outputs make it a more practical choice for multi-display workstation setups, though the GTX 850M's outputs are listed as portable-device-dependent.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs share the same chip, architecture, process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, ROP count, TDP, API support, and power connector requirement (none). The differences are as follows:

• Shading units: GTX 850M has 640, Quadro K1200 has 512
• TMUs: GTX 850M has 40, Quadro K1200 has 32
• Base clock: GTX 850M not listed, Quadro K1200 954 MHz
• Boost clock: GTX 850M not listed, Quadro K1200 1033 MHz
• Memory clock: GTX 850M 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective), Quadro K1200 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: GTX 850M 2 GB, Quadro K1200 4 GB
• Memory type: GTX 850M DDR3, Quadro K1200 GDDR5
• Memory bus width: Both 128 bit, but bandwidth differs: 32.03 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s
• Pixel rate: GTX 850M 14.43 GPixel/s, Quadro K1200 16.53 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: GTX 850M 36.08 GTexel/s, Quadro K1200 33.06 GTexel/s
• FP32: GTX 850M 1,154.6 GFLOPS, Quadro K1200 1,057.8 GFLOPS
• Slot width: GTX 850M IGP, Quadro K1200 single-slot
• Suggested PSU: GTX 850M not listed, Quadro K1200 200 W
• Bus interface: GTX 850M PCIe 3.0 x16, Quadro K1200 PCIe 2.0 x16
• Display outputs: GTX 850M portable device dependent, Quadro K1200 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2
• Dimensions: GTX 850M not listed, Quadro K1200 160 mm (6.3 inches) length, 69 mm (2.7 inches) height
• Release date: GTX 850M 2014-03-11, Quadro K1200 2015-01-27
• Predecessor: GTX 850M GeForce 700M, Quadro K1200 Quadro Fermi
• Successor: GTX 850M GeForce 900M, Quadro K1200 Quadro Maxwell
• Generation: GTX 850M GeForce 800M, Quadro K1200 Quadro Kepler (Kx200)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between these GPUs. The GTX 850M wins both.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 850M scores 9821 against the Quadro K1200's 8831. That is an 11.2% lead. This result aligns with the GTX 850M's higher shading unit count and higher FP32 throughput. The Quadro's higher memory bandwidth does not overcome the shader deficit in this compute-oriented test.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens. The GTX 850M scores 8782, while the Quadro K1200 scores 7698. That is a 14.1% advantage for the GTX 850M. Vulkan workloads often scale with shader count and efficient draw call handling, and the GTX 850M's extra 128 shading units appear to provide a clear benefit.

Looking at the broader database context, the GTX 850M's average benchmark score of 9302 puts it in the 46th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294, 0.1% slower), the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9313, 0.1% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273, 0.3% slower), and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221, 0.9% slower). The Quadro K1200's average of 8265 places it in the 43rd percentile, with nearest rivals including the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8325, 0.7% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (8167, 1.2% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8135, 1.6% slower), and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8129, 1.7% slower). The GTX 850M's average score is roughly 12.5% higher than the Quadro's, and its percentile ranking is 3 points higher.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M is the faster GPU in compute benchmarks. It wins both head-to-head tests, with an 11.2% advantage in OpenCL and a 14.1% advantage in Vulkan. Its higher shading unit count, higher texture rate, and higher FP32 throughput give it a clear edge in shader-bound and general compute workloads. Its average benchmark score of 9302 versus 8265 reinforces this picture.

The Quadro K1200 is not without strengths, but they lie elsewhere. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth is a major upgrade over the GTX 850M's 2 GB of DDR3 at 32.03 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-capacity sensitive or bandwidth-bound, the Quadro is the better choice. Its higher pixel rate (16.53 GPixel/s) and explicit base and boost clocks also suggest more predictable fill-rate performance. The Quadro's single-slot design with four mini-DisplayPort outputs makes it a more natural fit for professional multi-display setups, whereas the GTX 850M relies on portable-device-dependent outputs.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the decision rests on workload type. If the priority is raw compute performance, OpenCL, Vulkan, or shader-heavy tasks, the GTX 850M is the pick. If the priority is memory capacity, memory bandwidth, or workstation-style multi-display output, the Quadro K1200 is the pick. The GTX 850M also holds the edge in overall benchmark average and percentile ranking, making it the stronger all-around performer in the recorded data. The Quadro's advantages are real but specialized, and they do not translate into wins in the head-to-head tests.