Tesla M2090 vs GeForce GTX 670

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 670 with Tesla M2090, including specs and performance data.

GTX 670
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
13.83
+45.4%

GTX 670 outperforms Tesla M2090 by a considerable 45% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking376464
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.48no data
Power efficiency5.572.61
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGK104GF110
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date10 May 2012 (12 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1344512
Core clock speed915 MHz651 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt250 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature97 °Cno data
Texture fill rate109.841.66
Floating-point processing power2.634 TFLOPS1.332 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs11264

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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm248 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
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 amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5384 Bit
Memory clock speed6.0 GB/s924 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s177.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 670 13.83
+45.4%
Tesla M2090 9.51

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.

GTX 670 49
Tesla M2090 49

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.83 9.51
Recency 10 May 2012 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 250 Watt

GTX 670 has a 45.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 47.1% lower power consumption.

Tesla M2090, on the other hand, has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 670 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla M2090 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 670 is a desktop card while Tesla M2090 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
GeForce GTX 670
NVIDIA Tesla M2090
Tesla M2090

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 1158 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 30 votes

Rate Tesla M2090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.