NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile vs NVIDIA Tesla C2075

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile and NVIDIA Tesla C2075 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile

• Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 5 month(s) later
• Around 90% higher core clock speed: 1093 MHz vs 575 MHz
• Around 36% higher texture fill rate: 43.72 GTexel / s vs 32.2 GTexel / s
• Around 43% higher pipelines: 640 vs 448
• Around 36% better floating-point performance: 1,399 gflops vs 1,030.4 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 5.5x lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 247 Watt
• Around 67% higher memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 3000 MHz
• Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3230 vs 3017
• Around 1% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10582 vs 10493
• Around 96% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 52.821 vs 26.973
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.631 vs 3.142
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 48.966 vs 45.924
• Around 74% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 163.204 vs 93.747
• Around 75% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4941 vs 2825
• Around 75% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4941 vs 2825

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla C2075

• Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 35% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 428 vs 317
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 930.623 vs 793.297
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3705 vs 2645
• Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3705 vs 2645

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla C2075

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3230 3017
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	317 428
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	10582 10493
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	52.821 26.973
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	793.297 930.623
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.631 3.142
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	48.966 45.924
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	163.204 93.747
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4941 2825
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2645 3705
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3359 3346
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4941 2825
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2645 3705
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3359 3346

Compare specifications (specs)