NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M and the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 are both built on the same GM107 chip and Maxwell architecture, but they target different priorities. The GTX 960M is a mobile gaming part, while the K1200 is a desktop workstation card. Benchmark results from the database show a clear performance hierarchy between them, though the gap varies significantly depending on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two benchmark tests for these GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both tests, the GTX 960M comes out ahead, but the size of the victory is not consistent.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 960M scores 11045 points against 8831 for the Quadro K1200. That is a 25.1% advantage for the GTX 960M, a substantial margin that reflects the raw compute throughput difference between the two cards. The GTX 960M's higher clock speeds and larger shader count directly contribute to this result. This is the dominant win for the GTX 960M in the head-to-head data.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows considerably. The GTX 960M scores 8245 points, while the Quadro K1200 scores 7698. The delta here is only 7.1%. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can expose different bottlenecks, and the data suggests the Quadro K1200 is relatively more competitive in this workload. Still, the GTX 960M wins both tests, giving it a clean 2-0 record in the head-to-head comparison.

Looking at the broader database context, the GTX 960M's average benchmark score is 9645, which places it in the 46th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro K1200's average score is 8265, placing it in the 43rd percentile. The GTX 960M's closest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 with an average score of 9637 (a 0.1% difference) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 at 9653 (a 0.1% difference). The Quadro K1200, by contrast, sits near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, which scores 8135 (1.6% lower) and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 at 8129 (1.7% lower). This contextual data shows that while the GTX 960M is a mid-pack performer, the K1200 sits slightly lower in the overall performance distribution.

The individual benchmark scores reinforce this. For the GTX 960M, the OpenCL score of 11045 is notably higher than its Vulkan score of 8245, a difference of 2800 points. For the K1200, the OpenCL score of 8831 is also higher than its Vulkan score of 7698, but the gap is smaller at 1133 points. This indicates that the GTX 960M benefits more from OpenCL's compute-oriented workload, while the K1200's architecture handles Vulkan relatively better.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M is the faster GPU in both tested workloads. If the only criterion is benchmark performance, the GTX 960M is the clear pick. It wins OpenCL by 25.1% and Vulkan by 7.1%, and it holds a higher average benchmark score of 9645 versus 8265 for the K1200.

However, the choice is not purely about raw speed. The Quadro K1200 has a significantly lower thermal design power at 45 W compared to 75 W for the GTX 960M. It is also a single-slot desktop card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the GTX 960M is an MXM module with display outputs that depend on the portable device it is installed in. For a workstation that requires specific display connectivity and low power consumption, the K1200 has structural advantages that the GTX 960M cannot match, despite being slower.

The data supports this split: the GTX 960M is for users who prioritize raw compute and graphics performance in a mobile form factor. The Quadro K1200 is for users who need a low-power, single-slot desktop card with professional display outputs, and who are willing to accept a performance deficit of 25.1% in OpenCL and 7.1% in Vulkan. The GTX 960M is the better performer; the K1200 is the better fit for specific workstation constraints.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL, and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M wins with a score of 11045 against 8831 for the Quadro K1200, a 25.1% advantage.

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The GTX 960M also wins this test, scoring 8245 versus 7698 for the K1200, a 7.1% delta.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GTX 960M has an average benchmark score of 9645, while the Quadro K1200 averages 8265.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The GTX 960M is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 (9637) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9653). The K1200 is 1.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (8167) and 1.6% above the GTX 950M (8135).

Q: What are the power consumption figures for these cards?

A: The GTX 960M has a TDP of 75 W, while the Quadro K1200 has a TDP of 45 W, making the K1200 significantly more power-efficient.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The GTX 960M has 640 shading units, whereas the Quadro K1200 has 512 shading units.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs share the same memory configuration, but differ in several key compute and physical specifications.

Clock Speeds: The GTX 960M has a base clock of 1097 MHz and a boost clock of 1176 MHz. The Quadro K1200 runs at a base clock of 954 MHz and a boost clock of 1033 MHz. The GTX 960M is clocked higher in both states.

Shading Units: The GTX 960M has 640 shading units, while the K1200 has 512. This is a 128-unit difference in favor of the GTX 960M.

Texture Mapping Units (TMUs): The GTX 960M has 40 TMUs, compared to 32 on the K1200.

Render Output Units (ROPs): Both cards have 16 ROPs, so there is no difference here.

Pixel Rate: The GTX 960M achieves 18.82 GPixel/s, while the K1200 achieves 16.53 GPixel/s.

Texture Rate: The GTX 960M has a texture rate of 47.04 GTexel/s, versus 33.06 GTexel/s for the K1200.

FP32 Performance: The GTX 960M delivers 1.505 TFLOPS, whereas the K1200 delivers 1,057.8 GFLOPS (approximately 1.06 TFLOPS).

TDP: The GTX 960M is rated at 75 W, the K1200 at 45 W.

Slot Width: The GTX 960M uses an MXM Module form factor, while the K1200 is a single-slot card.

Bus Interface: The GTX 960M uses MXM-B (3.0), while the K1200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Display Outputs: The GTX 960M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the K1200 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2.

Dimensions: The K1200 is 160 mm (6.3 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) high. The GTX 960M's dimensions are not recorded.

Suggested PSU: The K1200 lists a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the GTX 960M has no suggested PSU listed.

Memory: Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). This is identical.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same fundamental architecture, so the differences are in implementation details rather than core design.

Chip and Architecture: Both use the GM107 chip and the Maxwell architecture. This means they share the same instruction set and feature support.

Process Node: Both are manufactured on TSMC's 28 nm process, with the same foundry.

Transistor Count and Die Size: Both have 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, with a transistor density of 12.6M / mm². This is physically the same chip.

Generation: The GTX 960M belongs to the GeForce 900M generation, while the K1200 is listed under the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation. This is a naming difference, but the underlying silicon is identical.

Memory Architecture: Both have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with identical bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s. There is no difference in memory capacity or speed.

API Support: Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Feature support is identical.

Ray Tracing and Tensor Cores: Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores, so there is no difference here.

Production Status: Both are listed as end-of-life products.

Release Dates: The K1200 was released on 2015-01-27, while the GTX 960M was released on 2015-03-12. The K1200 is about six weeks older.

Predecessor and Successor: The GTX 960M's predecessor is GeForce 800M and its successor is GeForce 10 Mobile. The K1200's predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell.

Power Connectors: Both cards have no power connectors, drawing power entirely from their respective slots or modules.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the GTX 960M a win in every recorded test, but the context of those wins matters for practical use.

The GTX 960M wins in raw compute performance. Its 25.1% OpenCL lead is substantial and reflects its higher clock speeds and 128 additional shading units. Any workload that is heavily compute-bound, such as OpenCL-based rendering or physics calculations, will see a clear benefit from the GTX 960M. Its FP32 throughput of 1.505 TFLOPS versus 1,057.8 GFLOPS for the K1200 reinforces this. The GTX 960M also wins in Vulkan, though the 7.1% margin is smaller, suggesting it is less dominant in that API.

The Quadro K1200 wins in efficiency and form factor. At 45 W, it consumes 30 W less than the GTX 960M's 75 W, which is a 40% reduction. This makes it suitable for systems where power budget and thermal output are critical. It is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, which is a standard workstation configuration. The GTX 960M is an MXM module with no fixed display outputs, making it dependent on the host laptop or device. The K1200 also has a suggested PSU of 200 W, which is a low requirement, and its dimensions of 160 mm by 69 mm are explicitly documented for chassis compatibility.

For a mobile gaming laptop, the GTX 960M is the obvious choice. It provides higher performance in both OpenCL and Vulkan, and its MXM form factor is designed for portable systems. There is no scenario in the data where the K1200 outperforms it in benchmarks.

For a desktop workstation with specific display needs, the K1200 has structural advantages. The four mini-DisplayPort outputs and single-slot design are not present on the GTX 960M. The lower TDP also makes it easier to cool in a small form factor workstation. The performance deficit is real, but it may be an acceptable trade-off for users who need those physical and power characteristics. The data shows the GTX 960M is the faster card, but the K1200 is the more flexible desktop solution.