Tesla M10 vs GeForce GTX 1070 SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1070 SLI with Tesla M10, including specs and performance data.
GTX 1070 SLI outperforms Tesla M10 by a whopping 389% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 126 | 532 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.71 | 2.38 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell (2014−2017) |
| GPU code name | Pascal GP104 SLI | GM107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 16 August 2016 (8 years ago) | 18 May 2016 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 3840 | 640 ×4 |
| Core clock speed | 1506 MHz | 1033 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1683 MHz | 1306 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 14400 Million | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 300 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 52.24 ×4 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 1.672 TFLOPS ×4 |
| ROPs | no data | 16 ×4 |
| TMUs | no data | 40 ×4 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
| SLI options | + | - |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 8 GB ×4 |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit ×4 |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 83.2 GB/s ×4 |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | 5.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 118
+392%
| 24−27
−392%
|
| 4K | 56
+460%
| 10−12
−460%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 100−110
+400%
|
21−24
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+394%
|
16−18
−394%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 100−110
+400%
|
21−24
−400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+421%
|
24−27
−421%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+394%
|
16−18
−394%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+433%
|
21−24
−433%
|
| Fortnite | 280
+409%
|
55−60
−409%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+407%
|
27−30
−407%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110
+395%
|
21−24
−395%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+422%
|
27−30
−422%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+430%
|
40−45
−430%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 100−110
+400%
|
21−24
−400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+421%
|
24−27
−421%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+394%
|
16−18
−394%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+404%
|
55−60
−404%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+422%
|
27−30
−422%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+433%
|
21−24
−433%
|
| Fortnite | 176
+403%
|
35−40
−403%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+407%
|
27−30
−407%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110
+395%
|
21−24
−395%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 87
+444%
|
16−18
−444%
|
| Metro Exodus | 80−85
+419%
|
16−18
−419%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+422%
|
27−30
−422%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 111
+429%
|
21−24
−429%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+430%
|
40−45
−430%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+421%
|
24−27
−421%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+394%
|
16−18
−394%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+422%
|
27−30
−422%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+433%
|
21−24
−433%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130−140
+407%
|
27−30
−407%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110
+395%
|
21−24
−395%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+422%
|
27−30
−422%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 73
+421%
|
14−16
−421%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+430%
|
40−45
−430%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 123
+413%
|
24−27
−413%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+480%
|
5−6
−480%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 240−250
+438%
|
45−50
−438%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+400%
|
14−16
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+410%
|
10−11
−410%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+400%
|
35−40
−400%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+392%
|
50−55
−392%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+411%
|
18−20
−411%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 80−85
+425%
|
16−18
−425%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+450%
|
18−20
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 60−65
+425%
|
12−14
−425%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+442%
|
12−14
−442%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 90−95
+411%
|
18−20
−411%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 27−30
+460%
|
5−6
−460%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 81
+406%
|
16−18
−406%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+433%
|
6−7
−433%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 54
+440%
|
10−11
−440%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+438%
|
40−45
−438%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+460%
|
10−11
−460%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+395%
|
21−24
−395%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+400%
|
9−10
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+442%
|
12−14
−442%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+443%
|
7−8
−443%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+400%
|
9−10
−400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 38
+443%
|
7−8
−443%
|
This is how GTX 1070 SLI and Tesla M10 compete in popular games:
- GTX 1070 SLI is 392% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1070 SLI is 460% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 37.20 | 7.61 |
| Recency | 16 August 2016 | 18 May 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 300 Watt | 225 Watt |
GTX 1070 SLI has a 388.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.
Tesla M10, on the other hand, has 33.3% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 1070 SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla M10 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1070 SLI is a desktop card while Tesla M10 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
