Tesla C2050 vs Quadro K5100M
Tesla C2050
Popular choices:
Quadro K5100M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Tesla C2050 is positioned at rank 334 and the Quadro K5100M is on rank 28, so the Quadro K5100M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Tesla C2050
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5100M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K5100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (8 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tesla C2050.
| Insight | Tesla C2050 | Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro K5100M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Tesla C2050 and Quadro K5100M
Tesla C2050
The Tesla C2050 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 25 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 574 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 238W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,176 points.
Quadro K5100M
The Quadro K5100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 771 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,264 points.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla C2050 scores 3,176 and the Quadro K5100M reaches 3,264 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla C2050 is built on Fermi while the Quadro K5100M uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 448 (Tesla C2050) vs 1,536 (Quadro K5100M). Raw compute: 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2050) vs 2.369 TFLOPS (Quadro K5100M).
| Feature | Tesla C2050 | Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,176 | 3,264+3% |
| Architecture | Fermi | Kepler |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 448 | 1536+243% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.028 TFLOPS | 2.369 TFLOPS+130% |
| ROPs | 48+50% | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 128+129% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+600% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla C2050 | Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Tesla C2050 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K5100M has 8 GB. The Quadro K5100M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 768 KB (Tesla C2050) vs 512 KB (Quadro K5100M) — the Tesla C2050 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla C2050 | Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 8 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla C2050 draws 238W versus the Quadro K5100M's 100W — a 81.7% difference. The Quadro K5100M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla C2050) vs 350W (Quadro K5100M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Tesla C2050 | Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 238W | 100W-58% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 13.3 | 32.6+145% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K5100M is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2011).
| Feature | Tesla C2050 | Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2499 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $95 | — |
| Codename | GF100 | GK104 |
| Release | July 25 2011 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #569 | #562 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla C2050 and Quadro K5100M
