GeForce GTX 670MX vs Tesla C2075

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla C2075 with GeForce GTX 670MX, including specs and performance data.

Tesla C2075
2011
6 GB GDDR5, 247 Watt
8.07
+69.5%

C2075 outperforms 670MX by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking569699
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.534.91
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF110GK104
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date25 July 2011 (15 years ago)1 October 2012 (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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores448960
Core clock speed574 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)247 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate32.1448.08
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS1.154 TFLOPS
ROPs4824
TMUs5680
L1 Cache896 KB80 KB
L2 Cache768 KB384 KB

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
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 amount6 GB3 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed783 MHz1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/s67.2 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVINo outputs
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA2.0+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Tesla C2075 8.07
+69.5%
GTX 670MX 4.76

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 C2075 3364
+69.7%
Samples: 12
GTX 670MX 1982
Samples: 472

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.

Tesla C2075 41
+128%
GTX 670MX 18

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 HD65−70
+62.5%
40
−62.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Palworld 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 96
+0%
96
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Palworld 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Palworld 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Palworld 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Palworld 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Palworld 0−1 0−1

This is how Tesla C2075 and GTX 670MX compete in popular games:

  • Tesla C2075 is 63% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.07 4.76
Recency 25 July 2011 1 October 2012
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 247 Watt 75 Watt

Tesla C2075 has a 70% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 670MX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 43% more advanced lithography process, and 229% lower power consumption.

The Tesla C2075 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 670MX in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla C2075 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 670MX is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 29 votes

Rate Tesla C2075 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 56 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 670MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla C2075 or GeForce GTX 670MX, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.