NVIDIA GRID K160Q vs NVIDIA Tesla C2075
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 1024MB VRAM GRID K160Q and 6GB VRAM Tesla C2075 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA GRID K160Q 's Advantages
Released 1 years and 11 months late
Lower TDP (130W vs 247W)
NVIDIA Tesla C2075 's Advantages
More VRAM (6GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (150.3GB/s vs 28.51GB/s)
256 additional rendering cores
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
GRID K160Q
0.326 TFLOPS
Tesla C2075
+215%
1.028 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jun 2013
Release Date
Jul 2011
GRID
Generation
Tesla
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
891 MHz
Memory Clock
783 MHz
Memory
1024MB
Memory Size
6GB
DDR3
Memory Type
GDDR5
128bit
Memory Bus
384bit
28.51GB/s
Bandwidth
150.3GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
SM Count
14
192
Shading Units
448
16
TMUs
56
16
ROPs
48
-
-
-
-
-
-
16 KB (per SMX)
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
256 KB
L2 Cache
768 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
3.400 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
16.07 GPixel/s
13.60 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
32.14 GTexel/s
-
-
-
326.4 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
1028 GFLOPS
13.60 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
513.9 GFLOPS
Board Design
130W
TDP
247W
300 W
Suggested PSU
550 W
No outputs
Outputs
1x DVI
-
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Graphics Processor
GK107
GPU Name
GF110
-
GPU Variant
GF110-351-A1
Kepler
Architecture
Fermi 2.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
40 nm
1.27 billion
Transistors
3 billion
118 mm²
Die Size
520 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_0)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.1
Vulkan
N/A
3.0
CUDA
2.0
5.1
Shader Model
5.1
