NVIDIA Tesla S1075 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Tesla S1075 and NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO 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, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla S1075
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 month(s) later
- 17x more texture fill rate: 4x 48.8 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 26.4 billion / sec
- 10x more pipelines: 4x 240 vs 96
- 9.4x better floating-point performance: 4x 622.1 gflops vs 264 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 55 nm vs 65 nm
- 42.7x more maximum memory size: 4x 4 GB vs 384 MB
- 2x more memory clock speed: 1600 MHz vs 800 MHz
| Launch date | 1 June 2008 vs 28 April 2008 |
| Texture fill rate | 4x 48.8 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 26.4 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 4x 240 vs 96 |
| Floating-point performance | 4x 622.1 gflops vs 264 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm vs 65 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 4x 4 GB vs 384 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz vs 800 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO
- 2.3x more core clock speed: 1375 MHz vs 610 MHz
- 7.6x lower typical power consumption: 105 Watt vs 800 Watt
| Core clock speed | 1375 MHz vs 610 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 105 Watt vs 800 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla S1075
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO
| Name | NVIDIA Tesla S1075 | NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 323 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 90 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2160 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2160 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Tesla S1075 | NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla |
| Code name | GT200B | G92 |
| Launch date | 1 June 2008 | 28 April 2008 |
| Place in performance rating | not rated | 1430 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $49.99 | |
| Price now | $49.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 13.43 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 610 MHz | 1375 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 4x 622.1 gflops | 264 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
| Pipelines | 4x 240 | 96 |
| Texture fill rate | 4x 48.8 GTexel / s billion / sec | 26.4 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 800 Watt | 105 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,400 million | 754 million |
| CUDA cores | 96 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVIHDTV |
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 9" (22.9 cm) | |
| SLI options | 2-way | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4x 4 GB | 384 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 4x 102.4 GB / s | 38.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 4x 512 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
