Tesla K20m vs NVS 5200M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 5200M with Tesla K20m, including specs and performance data.

NVS 5200M
2012
1 GB DDR3, 25 Watt
1.32

Tesla K20m outperforms NVS 5200M by a whopping 773% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1030418
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.64
Power efficiency3.633.53
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF117GK110
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)5 January 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,199

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 cores962496
Core clock speed625 MHz706 MHz
Number of transistors585 million7,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate10.00146.8
Floating-point processing power0.24 TFLOPS3.524 TFLOPS
ROPs440
TMUs16208

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXMPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB5 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit320 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1300 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s208.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

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
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA+3.5

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.

NVS 5200M 1.32
Tesla K20m 11.53
+773%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

NVS 5200M 508
Tesla K20m 4432
+772%

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:

Full HD10
−750%
85−90
+750%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data37.64

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Elden Ring 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Dota 2 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Elden Ring 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−750%
85−90
+750%
Fortnite 5−6
−700%
40−45
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−757%
120−130
+757%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
World of Tanks 27−30
−757%
240−250
+757%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Dota 2 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−750%
85−90
+750%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−757%
120−130
+757%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−713%
65−70
+713%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−733%
75−80
+733%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−700%
40−45
+700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%
Valorant 6−7
−733%
50−55
+733%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−713%
130−140
+713%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−767%
130−140
+767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−767%
130−140
+767%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Dota 2 16−18
−713%
130−140
+713%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Valorant 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%

This is how NVS 5200M and Tesla K20m compete in popular games:

  • Tesla K20m is 750% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.32 11.53
Recency 1 June 2012 5 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 5 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 225 Watt

NVS 5200M has 800% lower power consumption.

Tesla K20m, on the other hand, has a 773.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 months, and a 400% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Tesla K20m is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 5200M in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 5200M is a mobile workstation card while Tesla K20m 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 NVS 5200M
NVS 5200M
NVIDIA Tesla K20m
Tesla K20m

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.


3.6 150 votes

Rate NVS 5200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 17 votes

Rate Tesla K20m 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.