Quadro FX 350 vs Tesla C2050

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla C2050 and Quadro FX 350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Tesla C2050
2011
3 GB GDDR5, 238 Watt
8.23
+3641%

Tesla C2050 outperforms FX 350 by a whopping 3641% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5051370
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.410.73
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGF100G72
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date25 July 2011 (13 years ago)20 April 2006 (18 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 cores448no data
Core clock speed574 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million112 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)238 Watt21 Watt
Texture fill rate32.142.200
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPSno data
ROPs482
TMUs564

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 1.0 x16
Length248 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount3 GB128 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz405 MHz
Memory bandwidth144.0 GB/s6.48 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 Connectors1x DVI1x DVI, 1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.0-

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.

Tesla C2050 8.23
+3641%
FX 350 0.22

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.

Tesla C2050 3175
+3635%
FX 350 85

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 8.23 0.22
Recency 25 July 2011 20 April 2006
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 238 Watt 21 Watt

Tesla C2050 has a 3640.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

FX 350, on the other hand, has 1033.3% lower power consumption.

The Tesla C2050 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 350 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 Tesla C2050
Tesla C2050
NVIDIA Quadro FX 350
Quadro FX 350

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 16 votes

Rate Tesla C2050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Quadro FX 350 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.