Tesla M2090 vs Quadro K1200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1200 and Tesla M2090, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K1200
2015
4 GB 128-bit, 45 Watt
7.62

Tesla M2090 outperforms K1200 by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking525463
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.51no data
Power efficiency11.802.65
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM107GF110
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date28 January 2015 (9 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$321.97 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 cores512512
Core clock speed1058 MHz651 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate35.9741.66
Floating-point processing power1.151 TFLOPS1.332 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs3264

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 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length160 mm248 mm
Width1" (2.5 cm)2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 type128 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz924 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 80 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.02.0

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.

Quadro K1200 7.62
Tesla M2090 9.51
+24.8%

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.

Quadro K1200 26
Tesla M2090 49
+88.5%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.62 9.51
Recency 28 January 2015 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 250 Watt

Quadro K1200 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 455.6% lower power consumption.

Tesla M2090, on the other hand, has a 24.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Tesla M2090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1200 in performance tests.


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 Quadro K1200
Quadro K1200
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.


4.1 99 votes

Rate Quadro K1200 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.