GRID K140Q vs Tesla C2050
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing GRID K140Q and Tesla C2050. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between GRID K140Q and Tesla C2050. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
GRID K140Q
Tesla C2050
Main Specs
| GRID K140Q | Tesla C2050 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 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 | 1 GB | 3 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
- Tesla C2050 has 83% more power consumption, than GRID K140Q.
- GRID K140Q is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Tesla C2050 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Tesla C2050 has 2 GB more memory, than GRID K140Q.
- Both cards are used in Desktops.
- GRID K140Q is build with Kepler architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of GRID K140Q is 276 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- GRID K140Q is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2050 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Tesla C2050 is 1218 MHz higher, than GRID K140Q.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 9−10 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 500% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Battlefield 5 is 900% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 4% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 220−230 |
| medium / 768p | 75−80 | 190−200 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−33 | 110−120 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 70−75 |
| 4K / 2160p | 9−10 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 50−55 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 163% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 27% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Dota 2 is 148% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 6−7 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 1−2 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 800% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 300% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| low / 720p | 10−12 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 614% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| medium / 720p | 30−35 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 162% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 50−55 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Minecraft is 32% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 106% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 1−2 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 3600% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 3−4 | 65−70 |
| medium / 768p | − | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 2150% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 30−35 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 24−27 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in World of Tanks is 82% more, than GRID K140Q. | ||
Full Specs
| GRID K140Q | Tesla C2050 | |
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
| Code name | GK107 | GF100 |
| Type | Workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 28 June 2013 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 192 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Transistor count | 1,270 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 13.60 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 326.4 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1782 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.51 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
| 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 | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 90 Mh/s | |