GRID K160Q vs Tesla C2070
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing GRID K160Q and Tesla C2070. 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 K160Q and Tesla C2070. 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 K160Q
Tesla C2070
Main Specs
| GRID K160Q | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
- Tesla C2070 has 83% more power consumption, than GRID K160Q.
- GRID K160Q is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Tesla C2070 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Tesla C2070 has 5 GB more memory, than GRID K160Q.
- Both cards are used in Desktops.
- GRID K160Q is build with Kepler architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of GRID K160Q is 276 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- GRID K160Q is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2070 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Tesla C2070 is 1206 MHz higher, than GRID K160Q.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 9−10 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 440% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Battlefield 5 is 825% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| GRID K160Q and Tesla C2070 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 75−80 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 9−10 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 50−55 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 150% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 25% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Dota 2 is 142% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 6−7 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Far Cry 5 is 700% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Fortnite is 260% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 10−12 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Forza Horizon 4 is 542% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | − | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| medium / 720p | 30−35 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Grand Theft Auto V is 148% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 50−55 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Minecraft is 32% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 100% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 1−2 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 3100% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 3−4 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | − | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 1300% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 30−35 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 27−30 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in World of Tanks is 82% more, than GRID K160Q. | ||
Full Specs
| GRID K160Q | Tesla C2070 | |
| 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 | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.51 GB/s | 143.4 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 |