Tesla C2050 vs Quadro P5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5000 and Tesla C2050, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P5000
2016
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
32.66
+297%

P5000 outperforms Tesla C2050 by a whopping 297% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking164505
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.32no data
Power efficiency12.652.41
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGP104GF100
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 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 cores2048448
Core clock speed1607 MHz574 MHz
Boost clock speed1733 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,200 million3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt238 Watt
Texture fill rate277.332.14
Floating-point processing power8.873 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs16056

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
Length267 mm248 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 GB/s144.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort1x DVI
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.12.0

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 P5000 32.66
+297%
Tesla C2050 8.23

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.

Quadro P5000 12597
+297%
Tesla C2050 3175

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 HD96
+300%
24−27
−300%
4K39
+333%
9−10
−333%

Cost per frame, $

1080p26.03no data
4K64.08no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+338%
16−18
−338%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+338%
24−27
−338%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+300%
18−20
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+356%
18−20
−356%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+330%
40−45
−330%
Hitman 3 65−70
+325%
16−18
−325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+303%
35−40
−303%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+300%
27−30
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+344%
18−20
−344%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+322%
27−30
−322%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+337%
27−30
−337%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+338%
16−18
−338%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+338%
24−27
−338%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+300%
18−20
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+356%
18−20
−356%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+330%
40−45
−330%
Hitman 3 65−70
+325%
16−18
−325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+303%
35−40
−303%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+300%
27−30
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+344%
18−20
−344%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+322%
27−30
−322%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+325%
16−18
−325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+337%
27−30
−337%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+338%
16−18
−338%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+300%
18−20
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+330%
40−45
−330%
Hitman 3 65−70
+325%
16−18
−325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+303%
35−40
−303%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+322%
27−30
−322%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+342%
12−14
−342%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+337%
27−30
−337%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+344%
18−20
−344%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+336%
14−16
−336%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+308%
12−14
−308%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+322%
9−10
−322%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+311%
9−10
−311%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+313%
45−50
−313%
Hitman 3 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+331%
16−18
−331%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+336%
14−16
−336%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+317%
18−20
−317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+325%
40−45
−325%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+358%
12−14
−358%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+300%
8−9
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Hitman 3 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+298%
40−45
−298%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+333%
9−10
−333%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+300%
9−10
−300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+320%
10−11
−320%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%

This is how Quadro P5000 and Tesla C2050 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5000 is 300% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5000 is 333% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.66 8.23
Recency 1 October 2016 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 238 Watt

Quadro P5000 has a 296.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 150% more advanced lithography process, and 138% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla C2050 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 P5000
Quadro P5000
NVIDIA Tesla C2050
Tesla C2050

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.


3.6 177 votes

Rate Quadro P5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 16 votes

Rate Tesla C2050 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.