Tesla C2075 vs GeForce GTX 860M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 860M with Tesla C2075, including specs and performance data.

GTX 860M
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
7.89

Tesla C2075 outperforms GTX 860M by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking515486
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.312.45
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM107GF110
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date13 January 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 cores1152 or 640448
Core clock speed797 MHz574 MHz
Boost clock speed1085 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt247 Watt
Texture fill rate43.4032.14
Floating-point processing power1.389 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs4056

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data248 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz783 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s150.3 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
Ansel+no data

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
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 860M 7.89
Tesla C2075 8.72
+10.5%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 860M 3046
Tesla C2075 3364
+10.4%

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GTX 860M 30
Tesla C2075 41
+36.7%

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:

900p91
−9.9%
100−110
+9.9%
Full HD36
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
4K14
+0%
14−16
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%
Hitman 3 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−7.1%
60−65
+7.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%
Hitman 3 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
−8.3%
65−70
+8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−7.1%
60−65
+7.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%
Hitman 3 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−7.1%
60−65
+7.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−9.1%
24−27
+9.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−10%
55−60
+10%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how GTX 860M and Tesla C2075 compete in popular games:

  • Tesla C2075 is 10% faster in 900p
  • GTX 860M is 3% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.89 8.72
Recency 13 January 2014 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 247 Watt

GTX 860M has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 229.3% lower power consumption.

Tesla C2075, on the other hand, has a 10.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Tesla C2075 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 860M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M is a notebook card while Tesla C2075 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 860M
GeForce GTX 860M
NVIDIA Tesla C2075
Tesla C2075

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.


3.7 439 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 860M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 29 votes

Rate Tesla C2075 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.