NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 vs NVIDIA Tesla K10 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K10 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 are both end-of-life graphics cards from NVIDIA, but they serve fundamentally different purposes. The Tesla K10, a compute-focused accelerator from the Kepler generation, launches with a 2012 release date and a launch MSRP of 5,099 USD. The GeForce GTX 950, from the Maxwell 2.0 architecture and GeForce 900 series, arrived in 2015 with a launch MSRP of 159 USD. The data shows a clear divergence in design philosophy, with the Tesla K10 prioritizing raw compute throughput for professional workloads and the GTX 950 targeting conventional graphics output. In the single available cross-benchmark (Geekbench OpenCL), the GTX 950 scores 15662 against the Tesla K10’s 14029, a delta of -10.4% in favor of the consumer card. However, a closer look at the specifications and performance context reveals that the choice between these two depends entirely on whether the workload requires display outputs and modern API support or maximum memory bandwidth and raw shading power.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: choose the GTX 950 for any task that involves a display, modern graphics APIs, or power efficiency. The GTX 950 offers a 10.4% higher Geekbench OpenCL score (15662 vs 14029) than the Tesla K10. It also supports newer API standards, including DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Tesla K10 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Furthermore, the GTX 950 has display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2), making it functional as a regular graphics card, whereas the Tesla K10 has no outputs at all. For compute-only workloads where display output is irrelevant, the Tesla K10 still holds advantages in raw memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s vs 105.8 GB/s) and shading unit count (1536 vs 768), but its higher 225 W TDP and need for a 550 W suggested PSU make it a less practical option. The GTX 950, with a 90 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU, is the more sensible choice for almost any modern system.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla K10 wins on raw compute resources. It packs 1536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 ROPs, compared to the GTX 950’s 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives the Tesla K10 a higher texture rate of 95.36 GTexel/s versus 57.02 GTexel/s and a higher FP32 throughput of 2.289 TFLOPS versus 1.825 TFLOPS. The Tesla K10 also has double the memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB) on a wider 256-bit bus, yielding 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 105.8 GB/s. These specs favor the Tesla K10 in compute-heavy tasks like scientific simulation or data processing where memory bandwidth and shading throughput are the bottlenecks.

The GTX 950 wins on architectural efficiency and feature support. Despite fewer shading units and lower peak FP32, its Maxwell 2.0 architecture delivers a higher pixel rate (38.02 GPixel/s vs 23.84 GPixel/s) and a better Geekbench OpenCL score. The GTX 950 also has a higher transistor density (12.9M / mm² vs 12.0M / mm²) on the same 28 nm TSMC process, indicating a more efficient design. Its smaller die (228 mm² vs 294 mm²) and fewer transistors (2,940 million vs 3,540 million) contribute to a much lower 90 W TDP. For gaming or general-purpose graphics, the GTX 950’s superior API support (DirectX 12_1, Vulkan 1.4) and display outputs make it the only viable option of the two.

Architecture Differences

The Tesla K10 is built on the GK104 chip using the Kepler architecture, while the GTX 950 uses the GM206 chip with the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the transistor density differs: the Tesla K10 achieves 12.0M transistors per mm², while the GTX 950 achieves 12.9M per mm². This density difference is notable given that the Tesla K10 has a larger die (294 mm²) and more transistors (3,540 million) versus the GTX 950’s 228 mm² die and 2,940 million transistors.

The memory subsystems are markedly different. The Tesla K10 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, running at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), producing 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 950 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, running at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective), which results in 105.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla K10’s wider bus gives it a 51% bandwidth advantage, but the GTX 950’s higher effective memory clock partially compensates.

Feature sets also diverge significantly. The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Tesla K10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Tesla K10 has no display outputs, making it a pure compute accelerator, while the GTX 950 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Tesla K10 requires two power connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin) and a 550 W PSU, while the GTX 950 needs only a single 6-pin connector and a 250 W PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The GTX 950 scores 15662, which is 10.4% higher than the Tesla K10’s 14029.

Q: Can the Tesla K10 be used for gaming with a monitor?

A: No. The Tesla K10 has no display outputs, so it cannot connect to a monitor. The GTX 950, with its 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, is the only one of the two that can drive a display.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Tesla K10 has 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its 256-bit bus and 4 GB of GDDR5. The GTX 950 has 105.8 GB/s from a 128-bit bus and 2 GB of GDDR5.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Tesla K10 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Tesla K10 has a 225 W TDP and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, while the GTX 950 has a 90 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Tesla K10 has 1536 shading units, double the GTX 950’s 768. This contributes to its higher FP32 throughput of 2.289 TFLOPS versus 1.825 TFLOPS.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the GTX 950 wins decisively. The GTX 950 scores 15662, while the Tesla K10 scores 14029, yielding a delta of -10.4% when measured from the Tesla K10’s perspective. This result is surprising given the Tesla K10’s substantial hardware advantages: it has twice the shading units (1536 vs 768), over 1.5 times the texture rate (95.36 GTexel/s vs 57.02 GTexel/s), and 51% more memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s vs 105.8 GB/s). The GTX 950 compensates with a higher pixel rate (38.02 GPixel/s vs 23.84 GPixel/s) and a more modern architecture that appears to extract better real-world performance from its hardware.

In the broader context of the benchmark database, the Tesla K10’s average score of 14029 places it at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rivals being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 (avg 14150, -0.9% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 570X (avg 13871, +1.1% delta), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (avg 13821, +1.5% delta). The GTX 950’s average score is 13189, at the 53rd percentile, with rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 (avg 13300, -0.8% delta), the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 (avg 13075, +0.9% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (avg 13321, -1% delta).

The per-benchmark win count confirms this narrative: the GTX 950 wins 1 out of 1 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Tesla K10 wins 0. This single benchmark result, combined with the GTX 950’s superior API support and display connectivity, makes a strong case for the consumer card despite the Tesla K10’s theoretical compute advantages. The Tesla K10’s higher raw specs do not translate into a benchmark win, suggesting that its Kepler architecture is less efficient at executing the OpenCL workload than the Maxwell 2.0 architecture in the GTX 950.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The Tesla K10 uses the GK104 chip with Kepler architecture, while the GTX 950 uses GM206 with Maxwell 2.0. The Tesla K10 has a larger die (294 mm² vs 228 mm²) and more transistors (3,540 million vs 2,940 million), but a lower transistor density (12.0M / mm² vs 12.9M / mm²). Both use TSMC’s 28 nm process.

Clock speeds: The Tesla K10 has no listed base or boost clock, while the GTX 950 has a base clock of 1024 MHz and a boost clock of 1188 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the Tesla K10 runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the GTX 950 runs at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration is another major split. The Tesla K10 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the GTX 950 offers 2 GB on a 128-bit bus. This results in 160.0 GB/s bandwidth for the Tesla K10 versus 105.8 GB/s for the GTX 950.

Compute resources differ sharply: the Tesla K10 has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the GTX 950 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Tesla K10’s FP32 throughput is 2.289 TFLOPS versus 1.825 TFLOPS, and its texture rate is 95.36 GTexel/s versus 57.02 GTexel/s. The GTX 950 has a higher pixel rate at 38.02 GPixel/s versus 23.84 GPixel/s.

Power and physical specifications: the Tesla K10 has a 225 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, and a 550 W suggested PSU. The GTX 950 has a 90 W TDP, is also dual-slot, requires only 1x 6-pin, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Tesla K10 measures 272 mm (10.7 inches) in length, while the GTX 950 is 202 mm (8 inches). Both use PCIe 3.0 x16 interfaces. The Tesla K10 has no display outputs, while the GTX 950 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2. API support: the Tesla K10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175; the GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6.