GeForce GT 750M vs Tesla C2050
In this comparison between GeForce GT 750M and Tesla C2050 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 GeForce GT 750M will be the best choice, for others Tesla C2050 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Tesla C2050
GeForce GT 750M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce GT 750M 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 GT 750M here:
Main Specs
GeForce GT 750M | Tesla C2050 | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 238 Watt |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | 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 376% more power consumption, than GeForce GT 750M.
- GeForce GT 750M is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Tesla C2050 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce GT 750M has 1 GB more memory, than Tesla C2050.
- GeForce GT 750M is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2050 - in Desktops.
- GeForce GT 750M is build with Kepler architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GT 750M is 393 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- GeForce GT 750M 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 GT 750M.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 5−6 | 18−20 |
ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 10−11 |
QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 4−5 |
4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
low / 720p | 16−18 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 157% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | 10−11 | 27−30 |
ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
low / 720p | 24−27 | 60−65 |
medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 30−35 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Battlefield 5 is 184% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
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 GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 130−140 | 220−230 |
medium / 768p | 100−110 | 190−200 |
ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 110−120 |
QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 70−75 |
4K / 2160p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
high / 768p | 80−85 | 150−160 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 92% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 50−55 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 41% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 80−85 | 110−120 |
medium / 768p | 55−60 | 100−110 |
ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 70−75 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Dota 2 is 70% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 20−22 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
4K / 2160p | 5−6 | 7−8 |
low / 720p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 166% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | 7−8 | 27−30 |
ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 14−16 |
low / 720p | 60−65 | 110−120 |
medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 60−65 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 134% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | 10−11 | 30−35 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 10−12 |
4K / 2160p | 8−9 | − |
low / 720p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 193% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 50−55 | 95−100 |
medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
high / 1080p | 10−12 | 35−40 |
ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 14−16 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 5−6 |
medium / 720p | 45−50 | − |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 117% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | 3−4 | 10−12 |
ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 9−10 |
4K / 2160p | − | 2−3 |
low / 720p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 14−16 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Metro Exodus is 260% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | − |
medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Minecraft is 25% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | 6−7 | − |
ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 14−16 |
4K / 2160p | 0−1 | − |
low / 720p | 27−30 | 65−70 |
medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 153% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 9−10 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 18−20 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 180% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 21−24 | 65−70 |
medium / 768p | 14−16 | 40−45 |
high / 1080p | 6−7 | 21−24 |
ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 12−14 |
4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 7−8 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 200% more, than GeForce GT 750M. | ||
low / 768p | 75−80 | 90−95 |
medium / 768p | 40−45 | 60−65 |
ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 35−40 |
high / 768p | 30−35 | 55−60 |
The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in World of Tanks is 47% more, than GeForce GT 750M. |
Full Specs
GeForce GT 750M | Tesla C2050 | |
Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
Code name | N14P-GT | GF100 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Release date | 1 April 2013 | 25 July 2011 |
Pipelines | 384 | 448 |
Core clock speed | 967 MHz | 574 MHz |
Boost Clock | 967 MHz | |
Transistor count | 1,270 million | 3,100 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Texture fill rate | 30.94 | 32.14 |
Floating-point performance | 742.7 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
Length | 248 mm | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 2000 - 5000 MHz | 3000 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 64.19 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | |
DirectX | 12 API | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
CUDA | + | 2.0 |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
HDMI | + | |
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 27 Mh/s | 90 Mh/s |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Standard memory configuration | DDR3/GDDR5 | |
eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
HDCP content protection | + | |
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | + | |
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | + | |
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | + | |
Optimus | + | |
Blu-Ray 3D Support | + | |
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | + | |
Check Price |