GeForce MX110 vs Tesla C2070
If you are going to buy a new graphics card and are choosing between GeForce MX110 and Tesla C2070, there are a couple of things to consider. Cards with more VRAM in general perform better and allow you to play on higher graphics settings. Size also makes a difference. A model with a large heatsink can occupy up to three expansion slots on a motherboard. Be sure you have enough room in your PC case. When comparing GPUs with different architectures, more processing cores and even higher TFLOPS will not always translate to better performance. To help you decide which GPU you need, we have measured frame rates in a number of popular games. For more on how the GeForce MX110 stacks up against Tesla C2070, check out specs charts below.
Tesla C2070
GeForce MX110 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce MX110 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 MX110 here:
Main Specs
| GeForce MX110 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5/DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| Check Price |
- Tesla C2070 has 693% more power consumption, than GeForce MX110.
- GeForce MX110 is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Tesla C2070 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Tesla C2070 has 4 GB more memory, than GeForce MX110.
- GeForce MX110 is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2070 - in Desktops.
- GeForce MX110 is build with Maxwell architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of GeForce MX110 is 391 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- GeForce MX110 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 MX110.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 122% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Battlefield 5 is 133% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 6% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 80−85 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 71% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 31% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Dota 2 is 70% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Far Cry 5 is 144% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 60−65 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Fortnite is 100% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Forza Horizon 4 is 130% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Grand Theft Auto V is 89% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Metro Exodus is 166% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Minecraft is 21% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 45% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 90% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 24−27 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 16−18 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 6−7 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 115% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 35−40 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in World of Tanks is 31% more, than GeForce MX110. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce MX110 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
| Code name | N16V-GMR1 | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 January 2018 | 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 | 762.6 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB/s | 143.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
| CUDA | + | 2.0 |
| Optimus | + | |
| Check Price |