Tesla K80m vs GeForce GT 240
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1097 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.31 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) |
| GPU code name | GT215 | GK210 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 17 November 2009 (15 years ago) | 17 November 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 96 | 2x 2496 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 562 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 824 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 727 million | 7,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 69 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105C C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 17.60 | 2x 182.2 billion/sec |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2573 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | 2x 48 |
| TMUs | 32 | 2x 208 |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | no data |
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).
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | 267 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB or 1 GB | 2x 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2x 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz GDDR5, 1000 MHz GDDR3, 900 MHz DDR3 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 54.4 GB/s | 2x 240.6 GB/s |
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 Connectors | DVIVGAHDMI | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 17 November 2009 | 17 November 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 69 Watt | 300 Watt |
GT 240 has 334.8% lower power consumption.
Tesla K80m, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 240 and Tesla K80m. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce GT 240 is a desktop graphics card while Tesla K80m is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
