Quadro P3200 vs Tesla C2070
In this comparison between Quadro P3200 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 P3200 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 P3200 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Quadro P3200 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 P3200 here:
Main Specs
| Quadro P3200 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 238 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6084 MB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI | |
| Check Price |
- Quadro P3200 has 6078 GB more memory, than Tesla C2070.
- Quadro P3200 is used in Mobile workstations, and Tesla C2070 - in Desktops.
- Quadro P3200 is build with Pascal architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of Quadro P3200 is 134 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- Quadro P3200 is manufactured by 16 nm process technology, and Tesla C2070 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Quadro P3200 is 4020 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 20−22 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−12 | − |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 135% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 55−60 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | 21−24 | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 110−120 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 70−75 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Battlefield 5 is 148% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Quadro P3200 and Tesla C2070 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 250−260 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 220−230 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 190−200 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | 120−130 | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 80−85 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 210−220 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 45% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
| Quadro P3200 and Tesla C2070 have the same average FPS in Cyberpunk 2077. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 100−110 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Dota 2 is 18% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 50−55 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 16−18 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 85−90 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 50−55 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Far Cry 5 is 128% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 65−70 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| low / 720p | 190−200 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 120−130 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Fortnite is 104% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 65−70 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | 10−11 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| low / 720p | 110−120 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 70−75 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Forza Horizon 4 is 130% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 130−140 | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 75−80 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 35−40 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Grand Theft Auto V is 90% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 27−30 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 8−9 |
| QHD / 1440p | 18−20 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Metro Exodus is 169% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 120−130 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Minecraft is 13% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 110−120 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 53% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| high / 1080p | 27−30 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 9−10 | − |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 127% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 95−100 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 50−55 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−33 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 146% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 55−60 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | − | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro P3200 in World of Tanks is 9% more, than Tesla C2070. | ||
Full Specs
| Quadro P3200 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi |
| Code name | N18E-Q1 | GF100 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 27 February 2017 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 708 - 1202 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1228 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 3,100 million | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 32.14 | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,030.4 gflops | |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 143.4 GB/s | |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | DirectX 12_1, Shader 5.0 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Optimus | + | |
| Check Price |