Quadro NVS 110M vs Tesla M2090
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Tesla M2090 with Quadro NVS 110M, including specs and performance data.
M2090 outperforms 110M by a whopping 7873% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 530 | 1505 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.69 | 0.84 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | G72 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 25 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 cores | 512 | 7 |
| Core clock speed | 651 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 112 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 41.66 | 1.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.332 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 48 | 2 |
| TMUs | 64 | 4 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | no 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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 248 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| 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 | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 924 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | 4.8 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| 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.
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 | 8.77 | 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) | 250 Watt | 10 Watt |
Tesla M2090 has a 7872.7% 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 2400% lower power consumption.
The Tesla M2090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 110M in performance tests.
Be aware that Tesla M2090 is a workstation graphics card while Quadro NVS 110M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
