Tesla C2090 vs GeForce GTX 760A

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking747not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.03no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK106GF110
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date17 March 2014 (10 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 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 cores768512
Core clock speed628 MHz651 MHz
Boost clock speed657 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,540 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate42.0541.66
Floating-point processing power1.009 TFLOPS1.332 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs6464

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data248 mm
Widthno data2-slot

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1002 MHz924 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.13 GB/s177.4 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.02.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 March 2014 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 250 Watt

GTX 760A has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 354.5% lower power consumption.

Tesla C2090, on the other hand, has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 760A and Tesla C2090. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 760A is a notebook card while Tesla C2090 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760A
GeForce GTX 760A
NVIDIA Tesla C2090
Tesla C2090

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 25 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1 2 votes

Rate Tesla C2090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.