NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK vs NVIDIA Quadro K1200 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear split: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK dominates the shared benchmark suite outright, while the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 occupies a different tier entirely. In the two recorded head-to-head tests, geekbench_opencl and geekbench_vulkan, the TITAN BLACK wins both with no contest. The TITAN BLACK scores 27,218 in OpenCL and 29,561 in Vulkan, versus the Quadro K1200's 8,831 and 7,698 respectively. That is a 208.2% lead in OpenCL and a 284% lead in Vulkan. There is no benchmark in the database where the Quadro K1200 takes a win.

The use-case split, therefore, is not about one card winning some tasks and the other winning others. It is about scale. The TITAN BLACK is built for raw compute throughput: its Passmark G3D score of 9,184 and GPU compute score of 3,726 place it as a general-purpose heavyweight. The Quadro K1200, by contrast, only has two recorded benchmark entries, both Geekbench compute tests, and its average benchmark score sits at 8,265 versus the TITAN BLACK's 9,474. The Quadro K1200's percentile rank of 43 against all GPUs is slightly below the TITAN BLACK's 46, indicating both are mid-pack in the broader database, but the TITAN BLACK is consistently ahead within that range.

For users choosing based on workload, the TITAN BLACK is the clear pick for any compute-heavy task that uses OpenCL or Vulkan APIs. The Quadro K1200, with its smaller memory footprint and lower bandwidth, would only make sense in scenarios where the TITAN BLACK's size or power draw is prohibitive, but the benchmark data does not show any performance advantage for the Quadro in any test. The wins are 2 for the TITAN BLACK, 0 for the Quadro K1200, and that asymmetry defines the entire comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and different process generations, though both are fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm node. The TITAN BLACK uses the GK110B chip, which is the Kepler architecture, belonging to the GeForce 700 generation. The Quadro K1200 uses the GM107 chip, which is the Maxwell architecture, but its generation field is listed as "Quadro Kepler (Kx200)", which is a naming quirk in the database. Both have the same transistor density of 12.6M per mm², but the physical scale diverges sharply.

The TITAN BLACK packs 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die. The Quadro K1200 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. That is a 3.8x difference in transistor count and a 3.8x difference in die area. The TITAN BLACK's larger chip feeds a much wider memory interface: 384 bit versus 128 bit. Memory bandwidth is 336.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s, a 4.2x gap. The TITAN BLACK also has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory versus 4 GB, and its memory clock runs at 7 Gbps effective versus 5 Gbps effective.

The compute resources tell a similar story. The TITAN BLACK has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The Quadro K1200 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The TITAN BLACK's pixel rate is 58.80 GPixel/s versus 16.53 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 235.2 GTexel/s versus 33.06 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.645 TFLOPS versus 1,057.8 GFLOPS. The TITAN BLACK is roughly 5.3x faster in raw FP32.

Architectural features also differ. The TITAN BLACK supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Quadro K1200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The TITAN BLACK's bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Quadro K1200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The TITAN BLACK requires a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connector and a 600 W suggested PSU, while the Quadro K1200 has no power connectors and a 200 W suggested PSU. The TITAN BLACK is dual-slot, the Quadro K1200 is single-slot. The TITAN BLACK measures 267 mm long, 111 mm high, and 38 mm wide; the Quadro K1200 is 160 mm long and 69 mm high with no width recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly two shared tests, and both are decisive wins for the TITAN BLACK. In geekbench_opencl, the TITAN BLACK scores 27,218 against the Quadro K1200's 8,831. That is a delta of 208.2%, meaning the TITAN BLACK delivers more than three times the OpenCL performance. In geekbench_vulkan, the TITAN BLACK scores 29,561 against 7,698, a delta of 284%. The Vulkan margin is even larger, nearly four times the performance.

These are not marginal differences. The TITAN BLACK's OpenCL score alone is 3.1x the Quadro K1200's entire average benchmark score of 8,265. The TITAN BLACK's Vulkan score is 3.8x that same average. The Quadro K1200's best recorded score, 8,831 in OpenCL, is still lower than the TITAN BLACK's worst recorded score among its ten benchmarks, which is 34 in Passmark DirectX 12. That comparison is misleading because different test suites use different scales, but within the shared Geekbench tests, the ordering is unambiguous.

The TITAN BLACK also has a broader benchmark profile. It has ten recorded entries spanning DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, GPU compute, and three Geekbench tests. The Quadro K1200 only has two entries. This means the TITAN BLACK's average benchmark score of 9,474 is computed across a wider range of tests, while the Quadro K1200's 8,265 average comes from just two compute tests. The TITAN BLACK's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 at 9,458 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 M380 at 9,313 (1.7% behind), the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 at 9,637 (1.7% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M at 9,645 (1.8% ahead). The Quadro K1200's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M375X at 8,325 (0.7% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 at 8,167 (1.2% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M at 8,135 (1.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 at 8,129 (1.7% behind). The TITAN BLACK sits within 2% of a cluster of mid-range cards, while the Quadro K1200 also sits within 2% of a slightly lower cluster.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK has an average benchmark score of 9,474, while the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 has an average of 8,265. That is a 1,209 point gap, roughly 14.6% higher for the TITAN BLACK.

Q: How much faster is the TITAN BLACK in OpenCL?

A: In the geekbench_opencl test, the TITAN BLACK scores 27,218 versus the Quadro K1200's 8,831. The delta is 208.2%, meaning the TITAN BLACK is about three times faster in this specific workload.

Q: Does the Quadro K1200 win any benchmark?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests, geekbench_opencl and geekbench_vulkan, the Quadro K1200 loses both. The win count is 2 for the TITAN BLACK and 0 for the Quadro K1200.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The TITAN BLACK has a memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s from a 384 bit bus and 6 GB of GDDR5. The Quadro K1200 has 80.19 GB/s from a 128 bit bus and 4 GB of GDDR5. The TITAN BLACK provides roughly 4.2 times the bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The TITAN BLACK has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested PSU with one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector. The Quadro K1200 has a TDP of 45 W, a 200 W suggested PSU, and no power connectors.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The TITAN BLACK supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Quadro K1200 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro K1200 has a newer Vulkan version, but the TITAN BLACK has a higher DirectX feature level.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK | NVIDIA Quadro K1200 |

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

| Chip | GK110B | GM107 |

| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |

| Generation | GeForce 700 | Quadro Kepler (Kx200) |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Base Clock | 889 MHz | 954 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 980 MHz | 1033 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2880 | 512 |

| TMUs | 240 | 32 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 58.80 GPixel/s | 16.53 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 235.2 GTexel/s | 33.06 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.645 TFLOPS | 1,057.8 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 250 W | 45 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 200 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

| Width | 38 mm (1.5 inches) | null |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK is the superior card in every measured performance category. It wins both shared benchmarks, has a higher average score (9,474 versus 8,265), a higher percentile rank (46 versus 43), and offers 5.3 times the FP32 throughput. Its memory bandwidth advantage of 336.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s means any bandwidth-sensitive workload will heavily favor the TITAN BLACK. The Quadro K1200 is a lower-power, single-slot card with a 45 W TDP and no power connectors, but the benchmark data shows no scenario where it outperforms the TITAN BLACK.

For a user who needs raw compute in OpenCL or Vulkan, the TITAN BLACK is the only rational choice based on the recorded numbers. Its 208.2% and 284% leads in the shared tests are decisive. For a user who needs a compact, low-power card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs, the Quadro K1200 has a physical and power profile advantage, but that is a form-factor consideration, not a performance one. The TITAN BLACK is larger, heavier, and hungrier, but it delivers more than three times the compute performance in the tests where both are measured. The verdict from the database is straightforward: pick the TITAN BLACK for performance, pick the Quadro K1200 only if the physical constraints of a single-slot, 45 W card are absolute requirements and the performance gap is acceptable.