NVIDIA Quadro K1200 vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the NVIDIA Tesla M10 and the NVIDIA Quadro K1200?

A: The Tesla M10 records an average benchmark score of 9724, while the Quadro K1200 records 8265. That is a gap of roughly 1459 points in favor of the Tesla M10.

Q: Which card has the higher memory capacity and what is the difference?

A: The Tesla M10 ships with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, whereas the Quadro K1200 ships with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory. The Tesla M10 has twice the memory capacity.

Q: Do both cards use the same graphics processor?

A: Yes, both cards are built on the GM107 chip built on the Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC. They share the same transistor count of 1,870 million transistors and the same die size of 148 mm².

Q: Which card has the higher pixel fill rate and texture fill rate?

A: The Tesla M10 achieves a pixel rate of 20.90 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 52.64 GTexel/s. The Quadro K1200 achieves 16.53 GPixel/s and 33.06 GTexel/s.

Q: What are the peak FP32 performance figures for each card?

**A: The Tesla M10 delivers 1.672 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Quadro K1200 delivers 1,057.8 GFLOPS. Expressed in the same units, the Tesla M10 is about 614 GFLOPS higher.

Q: Which card has the lower power draw and smaller physical footprint?

A: The Quadro K1200 draws 45 W, is a single-slot card, uses no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 200 W. The Tesla M10 draws 225 W, is a dual-slot card, uses a single 8-pin connector, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Architecture Differences

Both the NVIDIA Tesla M10 and the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 are built on the same GM107 silicon using the Maxwell architecture, manufactured on the same 28 nm process at TSMC. The transistor count is identical at 1,870 million, and the die size is identical at 148 mm², producing the same transistor density of 12.6M per mm². However, the two cards are configured very differently.

The Tesla M10 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. This means the Tesla M10 carries 128 more shaders and 8 more TMUs, while both share the same ROP count.

Clock speeds also differ. The Tesla M10 runs at a base clock of 1033 MHz and boosts to 1306 MHz. The Quadro K1200 runs at a lower base clock of 954 MHz and boosts to 1033 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the Tesla M10 runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective transfer, while the Quadro K1200 runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective.

The memory subsystem differs in capacity but not in bus width. Both cards use a 128-bit GDDR5 interface. The Tesla M10 has 8 GB of memory and a bandwidth of 83.20 GB/s. The Quadro K1200 has 4 GB of memory and a bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s. The Tesla M10 therefore has roughly 3 GB/s more bandwidth on the same bus.

The two cards are also in different market segments and generations. The Tesla M10 is listed in the Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) generation, while the Quadro K1200 is listed in the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation. Despite sharing the same chip, the platform positioning differs. The Tesla M10 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the Quadro K1200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The Tesla M10 has no display outputs, whereas the Quadro K1200 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

Power and physical design are strongly differentiated. The Tesla M10 draws 225 W, requires a dual-slot cooler, uses a single 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU. It measures 267 mm in length. The Quadro K1200 draws 45 W, uses a single-slot cooler, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 200 W PSU. It measures 160 mm in length and 69 mm in height.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores. Both are marked end-of-life. The Tesla M10 was released later than the Quadro K1200, and its predecessor is Tesla Kepler with Tesla Pascal as successor. The Quadro K1200's predecessor is Quadro Fermi and its successor is Quadro Maxwell.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the NVIDIA Tesla M10 outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 in both recorded benchmarks. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Tesla M10 scores 10318 against 8831 for the Quadro K1200, a 16.8% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Tesla M10 scores 9130 against 7698, an 18.6% advantage. The win tally is 2 to 0 in favor of the Tesla M10.

For compute-oriented workloads that are captured by OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks, the Tesla M10 is the stronger card. It also offers double the memory capacity, which matters for datasets that exceed 4 GB. Its higher shader count and higher clocks give it a structural advantage that the benchmark results confirm.

However, the Quadro K1200 is not without purpose. It draws only 45 W, fits in a single slot, needs no power connector, and has a much lower suggested PSU requirement. It also has four mini-DisplayPort outputs, making it suitable for multi-display professional use. The Tesla M10 has no display outputs at all, so it is not a card for driving monitors directly.

The choice depends on the workload. For compute density and raw throughput in benchmark scenarios, the Tesla M10 is the pick. For a low-power workstation card with display connectivity, the Quadro K1200 is the pick despite its lower scores.

The percentile data places the Tesla M10 in the 47th percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro K1200 sits in the 43rd percentile. The Tesla M10's average benchmark score of 9724 places it near the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (9716, 0.1% difference), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (9780, -0.6% difference), the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (9665, 0.6% difference), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9653, 0.7% difference). The Quadro K1200's average score of 8265 places it near the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (8325, -0.7% difference), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (8167, 1.2% difference), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M (8135, 1.6% difference), and the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8129, 1.7% difference).

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards. The Tesla M10 has 640 shading units and 40 TMUs, while the Quadro K1200 has 512 shading units and 32 TMUs. ROPs are identical on both at 16. Base clock is 1033 MHz and boost is 1306 MHz on the Tesla M10, while the Quadro K1200 has a base of 954 MHz and boost of 1033 MHz. Memory size is 8 GB on the Tesla M10 and 4 GB on the Quadro K1200. Memory clock is 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective on the Tesla M10, while the Quadro K1200 runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective. Bandwidth is 83.20 GB/s on the Tesla M10 and 80.19 GB/s on the Quadro K1200.

Pixel rate is 20.90 GPixel/s on the Tesla M10 and 16.53 GPixel/s on the Quadro K1200. Texture rate is 52.64 GTexel/s on the Tesla M10 and 33.06 GTexel/s on the Quadro K1200. FP32 compute is 1.672 TFLOPS on the Tesla M10 and 1,057.8 GFLOPS on the Quadro K1200. TDP is 225 W on the Tesla M10 and 45 W on the Quadro K1200. Slot width is dual-slot on the Tesla M10 and single-slot on the Quadro K1200.

Power connectors are 1x 8-pin on the Tesla M10 and none on the Quadro K1200. Suggested PSU is 550 W on the Tesla M10 and 200 W on the Quadro K1200. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 on the Tesla M10 and PCIe 2.0 x16 on the Quadro K1200. Display outputs are absent on the Tesla M10 and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 on the Quadro K1200. Length is 267 mm on the Tesla M10 and 160 mm on the Quadro K1200. The Quadro K1200 has a listed height of 69 mm; the Tesla M10 has no height listed.

Generation is Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) for the Tesla M10 and Quadro Kepler (Kx200) for the Quadro K1200. Release dates differ, with the Tesla M10 released after the Quadro K1200. Predecessor is Tesla Kepler for the Tesla M10 and Quadro Fermi for the Quadro K1200. Successor is Tesla Pascal for the Tesla M10 and Quadro Maxwell for the Quadro K1200.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data contains two benchmark tests, and the NVIDIA Tesla M10 wins both.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Tesla M10 scores 10318, while the Quadro K1200 scores 8831. The Tesla M10 leads by 16.8%. That is the smaller of the two winning margins, but it is still a substantial lead. The difference translates to 1487 points.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Tesla M10 scores 9130, while the Quadro K1200 scores 7698. The Tesla M10 leads by 18.6%. The point difference here is 1432 points.

The average benchmark score for the Tesla M10 is 9724, which is 1459 points above the Quadro K1200's 8265. This places the Tesla M10 in the 47th percentile of all GPUs and the Quadro K1200 in the 43rd percentile.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context. The Tesla M10's average score is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA Tesla C2070, within -0.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, within 0.6% of the NVIDIA Quadro P4000, and within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100. The Quadro K1200's average score is within -0.7% of the AMD Radeon R9 M375X, within 1.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, within 1.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, and within 1.7% of the AMD Radeon R9 M360.

The margin between the two cards is consistent across both tests, hovering between roughly 17% and 19%. This consistency suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent. The Tesla M10's higher shader count, higher clocks, and higher memory bandwidth all contribute to this pattern.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla M10 wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 10318 is 16.8% higher than the Quadro K1200's 8831. Its Vulkan score of 9130 is 18.6% higher than the Quadro K1200's 7698. It has a higher average benchmark score, a higher percentile ranking, and it wins both recorded head-to-head tests.

The Tesla M10 also wins on memory capacity. With 8 GB versus 4 GB, it can hold larger working sets in memory, which is relevant for compute workloads that process large datasets. It also has a small bandwidth edge, 83.20 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s, and a higher effective memory clock.

The Tesla M10 wins on expansion interface generation. It uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Quadro K1200 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. For data transfer between CPU and GPU, the newer interface provides more headroom.

The Quadro K1200 wins on power efficiency. It draws 45 W versus 225 W, which is a five-fold difference in favor of the Quadro K1200. It requires no external power connector, while the Tesla M10 requires a single 8-pin connector. Its suggested PSU is 200 W versus 550 W for the Tesla M10. For systems with limited power budgets, this is a decisive advantage.

The Quadro K1200 wins on physical footprint. It is a single-slot card measuring 160 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The Tesla M10 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length. The Quadro K1200 can fit into smaller chassis and leaves adjacent slots open.

The Quadro K1200 wins on display connectivity. It provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, enabling direct connection to monitors. The Tesla M10 has no display outputs and cannot drive a display directly.

The Quadro K1200 also wins on power connector requirements. It needs no power connectors at all, which simplifies installation in pre-built workstations with limited PSU cabling.

In summary, the Tesla M10 is the compute-oriented choice with superior benchmark results, double the memory, and a newer PCIe interface, but it demands more power, more space, and offers no display outputs. The Quadro K1200 is the efficiency-oriented choice with a much lower power draw, a smaller single-slot footprint, and built-in multi-display support, but it trails in every recorded benchmark.