Tesla M2075 vs Quadro M2000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking441not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.60no data
Power efficiency9.46no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM206GF110
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date8 April 2016 (8 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$437.75 $2,399

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 cores768448
Core clock speed796 MHz574 MHz
Boost clock speed1163 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate55.8232.14
Floating-point processing power1.786 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs4856

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length201 mm248 mm
Width1" (2.5 cm)2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 type128 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz783 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/s150.3 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.22.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 8 April 2016 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 200 Watt

Quadro M2000 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

Tesla M2075, on the other hand, has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

We couldn't decide between Quadro M2000 and Tesla M2075. We've got no test results to judge.


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 Quadro M2000
Quadro M2000
NVIDIA Tesla M2075
Tesla M2075

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.


3.8 209 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1 vote

Rate Tesla M2075 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.