Tesla M2090 vs GeForce GTX 980

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 with Tesla M2090, including specs and performance data.

GTX 980
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 165 Watt
28.79
+203%

GTX 980 outperforms Tesla M2090 by a whopping 203% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking193463
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.89no data
Power efficiency12.162.65
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM204GF110
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date19 September 2014 (10 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores2048512
Core clock speed1064 MHz651 MHz
Boost clock speed1216 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate155.641.66
Floating-point processing power4.981 TFLOPS1.332 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs12864

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm248 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 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
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s924 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s177.4 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.1
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 980 28.79
+203%
Tesla M2090 9.51

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 980 96
+95.9%
Tesla M2090 49

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 HD91
+203%
30−35
−203%
1440p50
+213%
16−18
−213%
4K39
+225%
12−14
−225%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.03no data
1440p10.98no data
4K14.08no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+243%
14−16
−243%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 69
+229%
21−24
−229%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+206%
16−18
−206%
Battlefield 5 86
+219%
27−30
−219%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+243%
14−16
−243%
Far Cry 5 84
+211%
27−30
−211%
Far Cry New Dawn 77
+221%
24−27
−221%
Forza Horizon 4 253
+216%
80−85
−216%
Hitman 3 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+223%
40−45
−223%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+227%
30−33
−227%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+204%
24−27
−204%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130
+225%
40−45
−225%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+217%
35−40
−217%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 83
+207%
27−30
−207%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+206%
16−18
−206%
Battlefield 5 74
+208%
24−27
−208%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+243%
14−16
−243%
Far Cry 5 69
+229%
21−24
−229%
Far Cry New Dawn 64
+205%
21−24
−205%
Forza Horizon 4 230
+207%
75−80
−207%
Hitman 3 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+223%
40−45
−223%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+227%
30−33
−227%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+204%
24−27
−204%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+233%
30−33
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132
+230%
40−45
−230%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+217%
35−40
−217%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+250%
10−11
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+206%
16−18
−206%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+243%
14−16
−243%
Far Cry 5 50
+213%
16−18
−213%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+228%
18−20
−228%
Hitman 3 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+223%
40−45
−223%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+233%
30−33
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+229%
14−16
−229%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+217%
35−40
−217%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+204%
24−27
−204%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+236%
14−16
−236%
Far Cry New Dawn 44
+214%
14−16
−214%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+238%
8−9
−238%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+230%
10−11
−230%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Far Cry 5 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
Forza Horizon 4 147
+227%
45−50
−227%
Hitman 3 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+233%
18−20
−233%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+206%
18−20
−206%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+210%
21−24
−210%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+208%
12−14
−208%
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160
+214%
50−55
−214%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+206%
16−18
−206%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 22
+214%
7−8
−214%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
+243%
7−8
−243%
Hitman 3 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+222%
45−50
−222%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+240%
10−11
−240%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+222%
9−10
−222%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 16
+220%
5−6
−220%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+240%
10−11
−240%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+208%
12−14
−208%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%

This is how GTX 980 and Tesla M2090 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 is 203% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 is 213% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980 is 225% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.79 9.51
Recency 19 September 2014 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 250 Watt

GTX 980 has a 202.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 51.5% lower power consumption.

Tesla M2090, on the other hand, has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 980 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla M2090 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 is a desktop card while Tesla M2090 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 980
GeForce GTX 980
NVIDIA Tesla M2090
Tesla M2090

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.


4.3 1425 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 30 votes

Rate Tesla M2090 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.