Tesla M2090 vs GeForce GTX 275
Tesla M2090
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 275
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 M2090 is positioned at rank 379 and the GeForce GTX 275 is on rank 217, so the GeForce GTX 275 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Tesla M2090
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 275
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla M2090 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 275 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+75%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (248mm) | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Tesla M2090 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Tesla M2090 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $249), it costs 84% less, resulting in a 546% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+546%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($249) |
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 M2090 and GeForce GTX 275
Tesla M2090
The Tesla M2090 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 25 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 651 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,400 points.
GeForce GTX 275
The GeForce GTX 275 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 15 2009. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 633 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 219W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,349 points. Launch price was $249.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla M2090 scores 1,400 and the GeForce GTX 275 reaches 1,349 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla M2090 is built on Fermi 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 275 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 512 (Tesla M2090) vs 240 (GeForce GTX 275). Raw compute: 1.332 TFLOPS (Tesla M2090) vs 0.6739 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 275).
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,400+4% | 1,349 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+113% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.332 TFLOPS+98% | 0.6739 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48+71% | 28 |
| TMUs | 64 | 80+25% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+243% | 224 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Tesla M2090 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 275 has 896 MB. The GeForce GTX 275 offers 75% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 768 KB (Tesla M2090) vs 224 KB (GeForce GTX 275) — the Tesla M2090 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.875 GB+75% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+243% | 224 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (Tesla M2090) vs 11 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 275). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 2.
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (FL 11_0)+9% | 11 (10_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+39% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Supported codecs: CUDA,OpenCL (Tesla M2090) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce GTX 275).
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | No |
| Decoder | — | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | CUDA,OpenCL | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla M2090 draws 250W versus the GeForce GTX 275's 219W — a 13.2% difference. The GeForce GTX 275 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla M2090) vs 550W (GeForce GTX 275). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 248mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 219W-12% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-36% | 550W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 2x 6-pin |
| Length | 248mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 5.6 | 6.2+11% |
Value Analysis
The Tesla M2090 launched at $2500 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the GeForce GTX 275 launched at $249 and now averages $249. The Tesla M2090 costs 83.9% less ($209 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 35.0 (Tesla M2090) vs 5.4 (GeForce GTX 275) — the Tesla M2090 offers 548.1% better value. The Tesla M2090 is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2009).
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | GeForce GTX 275 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2500 | $249-90% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-84% | $249 |
| Performance per Dollar | 35.0+548% | 5.4 |
| Codename | GF110 | GT200B |
| Release | July 25 2011 | January 15 2009 |
| Ranking | #530 | #789 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla M2090 and GeForce GTX 275
