GeForce 920MX vs Tesla C2070
When choosing between GeForce 920MX and Tesla C2070, it is worth examining the specifications of the models in detail. Do they meet the recommended requirements of modern games and software? Storage capacity, form factor, TDP, available ports, warranty and manufacturer support are all important. For example, the size of a PC case can limit the maximum thickness and length of the card. Often, instead of the factory overclocked card and RGB backlight, it is better to choose a reference model with a more efficient GPU. And make sure that your current power supply unit has the correct connection pins (using adapters is not recommended). This GPUs compare tool is meant to help you to choose the best graphics card for your build. Let's find out the difference between GeForce 920MX and Tesla C2070.
Tesla C2070
GeForce 920MX is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce 920MX 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 GeForce 920MX here:
Main Specs
| GeForce 920MX | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 16 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |
| Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| Check Price |
- Tesla C2070 has 1387% more power consumption, than GeForce 920MX.
- GeForce 920MX is connected by PCIe 3.0 x8, and Tesla C2070 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Tesla C2070 has 4 GB more memory, than GeForce 920MX.
- GeForce 920MX is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2070 - in Desktops.
- GeForce 920MX is build with Maxwell architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of GeForce 920MX is 391 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- GeForce 920MX is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2070 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Tesla C2070 is 1188 MHz higher, than GeForce 920MX.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 300% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Battlefield 5 is 311% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 11% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 95−100 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 70−75 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 98% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 10% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Dota 2 is 90% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Far Cry 5 is 450% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Fortnite is 187% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Forza Horizon 4 is 290% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | − | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| medium / 720p | 35−40 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Grand Theft Auto V is 155% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 6−7 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Metro Exodus is 533% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 70−75 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Minecraft is 25% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 77% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 6−7 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 320% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 12−14 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 9−10 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 371% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in World of Tanks is 51% more, than GeForce 920MX. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce 920MX | Tesla C2070 | |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
| Code name | N16V-GMR | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 25 March 2015 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 256 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 965 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 993 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 3,100 million | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 23.83 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 602.1 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 143.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
| CUDA | + | 2.0 |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Optimus | + | |
| GPU Boost | 2.0 | |
| GameWorks | + | |
| Check Price |