Quadro M2200 vs Tesla C2070
In this comparison between Quadro M2200 and Tesla C2070 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 Quadro M2200 will be the best choice, for others Tesla C2070 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Tesla C2070
Quadro M2200 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Quadro M2200 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 Quadro M2200 here:
Main Specs
| Quadro M2200 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI | |
| Check Price |
- Tesla C2070 has 332% more power consumption, than Quadro M2200.
- Tesla C2070 has 2 GB more memory, than Quadro M2200.
- Quadro M2200 is used in Mobile workstations, and Tesla C2070 - in Desktops.
- Quadro M2200 is build with Maxwell architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of Quadro M2200 is 120 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- Quadro M2200 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2070 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Quadro M2200 is 2520 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 21−24 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 8−9 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 6−7 | − |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 27−30 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 35% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Battlefield 5 is 44% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Quadro M2200 and Tesla C2070 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 240−250 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 210−220 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 130−140 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | 100−110 | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 55−60 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 180−190 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 25% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 55−60 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 9% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 85−90 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Dota 2 is 12% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 27−30 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 9−10 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 55−60 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Far Cry 5 is 38% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 130−140 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 80−85 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Fortnite is 30% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−33 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 10−11 |
| 4K / 2160p | 14−16 | − |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Forza Horizon 4 is 36% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 110−120 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 100−110 | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 10−11 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Grand Theft Auto V is 34% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| QHD / 1440p | 10−12 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Metro Exodus is 53% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 110−120 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Minecraft is 4% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 15% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | − |
| low / 720p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 33% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 27−30 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 9−10 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 39% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro M2200 in World of Tanks is 1% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
Full Specs
| Quadro M2200 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
| Code name | N17P-Q3 | GF100 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 13 January 2017 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 694 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1870 Million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 32.14 | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,030.4 gflops | |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5508 MHz | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 88 GB/s | 143.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Optimus | + | |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
| Mosaic | + | |
| nView Display Management | + | |
| 3D Stereo | + | |
| Check Price |