FirePro M5100 vs Tesla M2070 Q
In this comparison between FirePro M5100 and Tesla M2070 Q you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FirePro M5100 will be the best choice, for others Tesla M2070 Q will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Tesla M2070 Q
FirePro M5100 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: FirePro M5100 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with FirePro M5100 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro M5100 | Tesla M2070 Q | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- FirePro M5100 is connected by MXM-A (3.0), and Tesla M2070 Q uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Tesla M2070 Q has 4 GB more memory, than FirePro M5100.
- FirePro M5100 is used in Mobile workstations, and Tesla M2070 Q - in Desktops.
- FirePro M5100 is build with GCN architecture, and Tesla M2070 Q - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of FirePro M5100 is 151 MHz higher, than Tesla M2070 Q.
- FirePro M5100 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla M2070 Q - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro M5100 is 1368 MHz higher, than Tesla M2070 Q.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 1−2 |
| QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 116% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 6−7 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Battlefield 5 is 100% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | − | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| FirePro M5100 and Tesla M2070 Q have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 170−180 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 140−150 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 70−75 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 30−33 | − |
| high / 768p | 100−110 | 75−80 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 40% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla M2070 Q in Cyberpunk 2077 is 2% more, than FirePro M5100. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 75−80 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Dota 2 is 34% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Far Cry 5 is 133% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Fortnite is 48% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 10−11 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Forza Horizon 4 is 91% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | − |
| high / 1080p | 20−22 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 9−10 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Grand Theft Auto V is 45% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 20−22 | 9−10 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Metro Exodus is 140% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | − | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 90−95 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Minecraft is 20% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 30% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 85% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 20−22 |
| medium / 768p | 24−27 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | 1−2 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 100% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5100 in World of Tanks is 30% more, than Tesla M2070 Q. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M5100 | Tesla M2070 Q | |
| Architecture | GCN | Fermi |
| Code name | Venus | GF100 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 October 2013 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 640 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 31.00 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 992.0 gflops | 1,027.7 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 3132 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 150.3 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 108 Mh/s | 94 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Check Price |