GeForce FX 5200 vs Tesla M2070
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Tesla M2070 with GeForce FX 5200, including specs and performance data.
Tesla M2070 outperforms FX 5200 by a whopping 24350% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 636 | 1493 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.11 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.49 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Celsius (1999−2005) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | NV18 C1 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 25 July 2011 (13 years ago) | 6 March 2003 (21 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,099 | $69.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 448 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 574 MHz | 250 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 29 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 32.14 | 1.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.03 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 48 | 2 |
| TMUs | 56 | 4 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | AGP 8x |
| Length | 248 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |
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 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 783 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 150.3 GB/s | 6.4 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 8.0 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.89 | 0.02 |
| Recency | 25 July 2011 | 6 March 2003 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 150 nm |
Tesla M2070 has a 24350% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.
The Tesla M2070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5200 in performance tests.
Be aware that Tesla M2070 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce FX 5200 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
