GeForce 840M vs Tesla C2050
When comparing GeForce 840M and Tesla C2050, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card - this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between GeForce 840M and Tesla C2050 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.
Tesla C2050
GeForce 840M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce 840M 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 840M here:
Main Specs
| GeForce 840M | Tesla C2050 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| Check Price |
- Tesla C2050 has 621% more power consumption, than GeForce 840M.
- GeForce 840M is connected by PCIe 3.0 x8, and Tesla C2050 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce 840M has 1 GB more memory, than Tesla C2050.
- GeForce 840M is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2050 - in Desktops.
- GeForce 840M is build with Maxwell architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of GeForce 840M is 455 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- GeForce 840M is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2050 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Tesla C2050 is 1000 MHz higher, than GeForce 840M.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 333% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Battlefield 5 is 344% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 15% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 220−230 |
| medium / 768p | 90−95 | 190−200 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 110−120 |
| QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 70−75 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 65−70 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 114% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 12% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Dota 2 is 90% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 480% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 200% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 388% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| medium / 720p | 35−40 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 177% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 5−6 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Metro Exodus is 600% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| 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 C2050 in Minecraft is 25% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 83% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 6−7 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 360% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| low / 768p | 12−14 | 65−70 |
| medium / 768p | 9−10 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 414% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
| 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 C2050 in World of Tanks is 51% more, than GeForce 840M. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce 840M | Tesla C2050 | |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
| Code name | N15S-GT | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 12 March 2014 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 384 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 1029 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 3,100 million | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 17.98 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 16.02 GB/s | 144.0 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 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 92 Mh/s | 90 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Optimus | + | |
| GPU Boost | 2.0 | |
| GameWorks | + | |
| Check Price |