Tesla C2090 vs GeForce GT 440
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 955 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.08 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.17 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | GF108 | GF110 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 February 2011 (14 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $79 | 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 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 810 MHz | 651 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 585 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 12.96 | 41.66 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.311 TFLOPS | 1.332 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 48 |
| TMUs | 16 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 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).
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | 248 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB | 6 GB |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 1 GB GDDR5 or 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz (GDDR5) or 900 MHz (DDR3) | 924 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 (DDR3) – 51.2 (GDDR5) | 177.4 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 | HDMIVGADual Link DVI | 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 | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 February 2011 | 25 July 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB | 6 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 250 Watt |
GT 440 has a 8433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 284.6% lower power consumption.
Tesla C2090, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 440 and Tesla C2090. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce GT 440 is a desktop graphics card while Tesla C2090 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.
