NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• Around 91% higher core clock speed: 1096 MHz vs 575 MHz
• Around 46% higher texture fill rate: 47.04 GTexel / s vs 32.2 GTexel / s
• Around 43% higher pipelines: 640 vs 448
• Around 46% better floating-point performance: 1,505 gflops vs 1,030.4 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 3.2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 238 Watt
• Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3366 vs 3121
• Around 13% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10999 vs 9716
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 vs 26.223
• Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 vs 3.015
• Around 19% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 vs 43.519
• Around 87% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 174.513 vs 93.344
• Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 vs 3245
• Around 62% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 vs 3245

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla C2070

• Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 20% higher memory clock speed: 3000 MHz vs 2500 MHz
• Around 89% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 462 vs 245
• Around 14% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 908.754 vs 795.325

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla C2070

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3366 3121
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	245 462
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	10999 9716
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	54.294 26.223
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	795.325 908.754
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.692 3.015
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	51.794 43.519
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	174.513 93.344
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5264 3245
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3714 3710
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3351
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5264 3245
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3714 3710
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3351

Compare specifications (specs)