Quadro NVS 110M vs Tesla C2075

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla C2075 with Quadro NVS 110M, including specs and performance data.

Tesla C2075
2011
6 GB GDDR5, 247 Watt
8.04
+7209%

C2075 outperforms 110M by a whopping 7209% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5531506
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.500.84
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGF110G72
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date25 July 2011 (14 years ago)1 June 2006 (19 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 cores4487
Core clock speed574 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data300 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million112 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)247 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate32.141.200
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPSno data
ROPs482
TMUs564
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache768 KBno data

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 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount6 GB512 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed783 MHz300 MHz
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/s4.8 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 Connectors1x DVINo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.0-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Tesla C2075 8.04
+7209%
NVS 110M 0.11

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.

Tesla C2075 3364
+7057%
Samples: 12
NVS 110M 47
Samples: 101

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 27 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.04 0.11
Recency 25 July 2011 1 June 2006
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 247 Watt 10 Watt

Tesla C2075 has a 7209.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 110M, on the other hand, has 2370% lower power consumption.

The Tesla C2075 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 110M in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla C2075 is a workstation graphics card while Quadro NVS 110M is a mobile workstation one.

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 Tesla C2075
Tesla C2075
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M
Quadro NVS 110M

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.


3.1 29 votes

Rate Tesla C2075 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 7 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 110M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla C2075 or Quadro NVS 110M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.