Tesla C2070 vs Quadro M1200
Tesla C2070
Popular choices:
Quadro M1200
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. The Tesla C2070 is positioned at rank #287 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Tesla C2070
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro M1200 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2011). The Quadro M1200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Tesla C2070 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M1200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Tesla C2070 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (248mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Tesla C2070 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Tesla C2070 holds the technical lead. Priced at $38 (vs $40), it costs 5% less, resulting in a 2.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($38) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) |
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 C2070 and Quadro M1200
Tesla C2070
The Tesla C2070 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: 3,121 points.
Quadro M1200
The Quadro M1200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1093 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,212 points.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla C2070 scores 3,121 and the Quadro M1200 reaches 3,212 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla C2070 is built on Fermi while the Quadro M1200 uses Maxwell, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 448 (Tesla C2070) vs 640 (Quadro M1200). Raw compute: 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2070) vs 1.399 TFLOPS (Quadro M1200).
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,121 | 3,212+3% |
| Architecture | Fermi | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 448 | 640+43% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.028 TFLOPS | 1.399 TFLOPS+36% |
| ROPs | 48+200% | 16 |
| TMUs | 56+40% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+180% | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.75 MB | 2 MB+167% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 C2070 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M1200 has 4 GB. The Tesla C2070 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.75 MB (Tesla C2070) vs 2 MB (Quadro M1200) — the Quadro M1200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.75 MB | 2 MB+167% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Tesla C2070) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro M1200). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 4.
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 1 | 4+300% |
Media & Encoding
Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Tesla C2070) vs H.264,HEVC,VP8 (Quadro M1200).
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) |
| Decoder | — | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,HEVC,VP8 |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla C2070 draws 238W versus the Quadro M1200's 45W — a 136.4% difference. The Quadro M1200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla C2070) vs 350W (Quadro M1200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 238W | 45W-81% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 248mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 82°C |
| Perf/Watt | 13.1 | 71.4+445% |
Value Analysis
The Tesla C2070 launched at $1499 MSRP and currently averages $38, while the Quadro M1200 launched at $0 and now averages $40. The Tesla C2070 costs 5% less ($2 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 82.1 (Tesla C2070) vs 80.3 (Quadro M1200) — the Tesla C2070 offers 2.2% better value. The Quadro M1200 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2011).
| Feature | Tesla C2070 | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1499 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $38-5% | $40 |
| Performance per Dollar | 82.1+2% | 80.3 |
| Codename | GF100 | GM107 |
| Release | July 25 2011 | January 11 2017 |
| Ranking | #575 | #567 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla C2070 and Quadro M1200
