GeForce 9650M GT vs Tesla M2070

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla M2070 with GeForce 9650M GT, including specs and performance data.

Tesla M2070
2011, $3,099
6 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
4.52
+1270%

M2070 outperforms 9650M by a whopping 1270% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7131386
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
Power efficiency1.551.11
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGF100G96C
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date25 July 2011 (15 years ago)19 August 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,099 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores44832
Core clock speed574 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate32.148.800
Floating-point processing power1.03 TFLOPS0.0848 TFLOPS
ROPs488
TMUs5616
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache768 KB32 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 datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-II
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB256 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed783 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Maximum VGA resolutionno data1920x1200

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.0+

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Palworld 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 30 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.52 0.33
Recency 25 July 2011 19 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 23 Watt

Tesla M2070 has a 1270% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 38% more advanced lithography process.

9650M GT, on the other hand, has 878% lower power consumption.

The Tesla M2070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9650M GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla M2070 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 9650M GT 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.


5 5 votes

Rate Tesla M2070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 9 votes

Rate GeForce 9650M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla M2070 or GeForce 9650M GT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.