Tesla M2090 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile with Tesla M2090, including specs and performance data.
1050 Mobile outperforms M2090 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 471 | 530 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.83 | 2.70 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | GP107B | GF110 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 3 January 2017 (8 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (14 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 cores | 640 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 1354 MHz | 651 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1493 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,300 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 59.72 | 41.66 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.911 TFLOPS | 1.332 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 48 |
| TMUs | 40 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 240 KB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 248 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin + 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 | 4000 MB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | 924 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 177.4 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 Connectors | DP 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDCP | 2.2 | - |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | + | - |
| GPU Boost | 3.0 | no data |
| Ansel | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | + | 2.0 |
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:
| 900p | 73
+21.7%
| 60−65
−21.7%
|
| Full HD | 46
+31.4%
| 35−40
−31.4%
|
| 1440p | 24
+33.3%
| 18−20
−33.3%
|
| 4K | 15
+25%
| 12−14
−25%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 51
+27.5%
|
40−45
−27.5%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 54
+35%
|
40−45
−35%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+30%
|
30−33
−30%
|
| Fortnite | 132
+32%
|
100−105
−32%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55
+22.2%
|
45−50
−22.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 46
+31.4%
|
35−40
−31.4%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 44
+25.7%
|
35−40
−25.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 150−160
+21.5%
|
130−140
−21.5%
|
| Dota 2 | 126
+26%
|
100−105
−26%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 44
+25.7%
|
35−40
−25.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
+33.3%
|
27−30
−33.3%
|
| Fortnite | 51
+27.5%
|
40−45
−27.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 52
+30%
|
40−45
−30%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 42
+40%
|
30−33
−40%
|
| Metro Exodus | 19
+35.7%
|
14−16
−35.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 41
+36.7%
|
30−33
−36.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 39
+30%
|
30−33
−30%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 37
+23.3%
|
30−33
−23.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 115
+21.1%
|
95−100
−21.1%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 40
+33.3%
|
30−33
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 33
+22.2%
|
27−30
−22.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 37
+23.3%
|
30−33
−23.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 29
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 22
+22.2%
|
18−20
−22.2%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 39
+30%
|
30−33
−30%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 80−85
+24.6%
|
65−70
−24.6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 11
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 26
+23.8%
|
21−24
−23.8%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 25
+38.9%
|
18−20
−38.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21
+31.3%
|
16−18
−31.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 26
+23.8%
|
21−24
−23.8%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 25
+38.9%
|
18−20
−38.9%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+22.2%
|
18−20
−22.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 13
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| Dota 2 | 34
+25.9%
|
27−30
−25.9%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 11
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 15
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
This is how GTX 1050 Mobile and Tesla M2090 compete in popular games:
- GTX 1050 Mobile is 22% faster in 900p
- GTX 1050 Mobile is 31% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1050 Mobile is 33% faster in 1440p
- GTX 1050 Mobile is 25% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.43 | 8.66 |
| Recency | 3 January 2017 | 25 July 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4000 MB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 250 Watt |
GTX 1050 Mobile has a 20.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.
Tesla M2090, on the other hand, has a 53.6% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla M2090 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Tesla M2090 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.
