Tesla C2075 vs GeForce GTX 870M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 870M with Tesla C2075, including specs and performance data.

GTX 870M
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.94
+2.5%

GTX 870M outperforms Tesla C2075 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking486490
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.232.46
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK104GF110
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date12 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 cores1344448
Core clock speed941 MHz574 MHz
Boost clock speed967 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt247 Watt
Texture fill rate108.332.14
Floating-point processing power2.599 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs2448
TMUs11256

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 sizelargeno 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 amount3 GB6 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width192 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz783 MHz
Memory bandwidth120.0 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+-

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 870M 8.94
+2.5%
Tesla C2075 8.72

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 870M 3449
+2.5%
Tesla C2075 3364

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 870M 34
Tesla C2075 41
+20.6%

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 HD45
+12.5%
40−45
−12.5%
4K19
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+12.5%
24−27
−12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%
Hitman 3 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+12.5%
24−27
−12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%
Hitman 3 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 88
+3.5%
85−90
−3.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%
Hitman 3 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Hitman 3 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+3.6%
55−60
−3.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

This is how GTX 870M and Tesla C2075 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 870M is 13% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 870M is 6% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.94 8.72
Recency 12 March 2014 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 247 Watt

GTX 870M has a 2.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 147% lower power consumption.

Tesla C2075, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 870M and Tesla C2075.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 870M 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 870M
GeForce GTX 870M
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.


3.9 106 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 870M 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.