
GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
Popular choices:

Tesla C2050 / C2070
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
2013Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,330 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1373.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 20.2 vs 1.4 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 134W instead of 238W, a 104W reduction.
- ✅Measures 241mm instead of 248mm, a 7mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Tesla C2050 / C2070
2011Why buy it
- ✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌1378.7% HIGHER MSRP$2,499 MSRPvs$169 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.4 vs 20.2 G3D/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
- ❌77.6% higher power demand at 238W vs 134W.
GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
2013Tesla C2050 / C2070
2011Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,330 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1373.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 20.2 vs 1.4 G3D/$ ($169 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 134W instead of 238W, a 104W reduction.
- ✅Measures 241mm instead of 248mm, a 7mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌1378.7% HIGHER MSRP$2,499 MSRPvs$169 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.4 vs 20.2 G3D/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
- ❌77.6% higher power demand at 238W vs 134W.
Quick Answers
So, is Tesla C2050 / C2070 better than GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST make more sense than Tesla C2050 / C2070?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 31 FPS | 83 FPS |
| medium | 20 FPS | 72 FPS |
| high | 14 FPS | 52 FPS |
| ultra | 8 FPS | 33 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 24 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 14 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 7 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 4 FPS | 24 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 9 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 6 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 3 FPS | 15 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 13 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 43 FPS | 121 FPS |
| medium | 20 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 15 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 10 FPS | 58 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 22 FPS | 79 FPS |
| medium | 9 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 7 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 5 FPS | 33 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 7 FPS | 36 FPS |
| medium | 4 FPS | 28 FPS |
| high | 3 FPS | 25 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 19 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 154 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 103 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 115 FPS | 116 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 93 FPS |
| high | 77 FPS | 77 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 77 FPS | 77 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 51 FPS | 51 FPS |
| ultra | 38 FPS | 39 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 133 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 75 FPS | 103 FPS |
| ultra | 56 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 78 FPS | 116 FPS |
| medium | 57 FPS | 93 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 77 FPS |
| ultra | 34 FPS | 58 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 42 FPS | 77 FPS |
| medium | 29 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 24 FPS | 51 FPS |
| ultra | 16 FPS | 39 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST and Tesla C2050 / C2070

GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 26 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 134W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,415 points. Launch price was $169.

Tesla C2050 / C2070
Tesla C2050 / C2070
The Tesla C2050 / C2070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 25 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 574 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 238W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,428 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST scores 3,415 and the Tesla C2050 / C2070 reaches 3,428 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is built on Kepler while the Tesla C2050 / C2070 uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 448 (Tesla C2050 / C2070). Raw compute: 1.585 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2050 / C2070).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,415 | 3,428 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+71% | 448 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.585 TFLOPS+54% | 1.028 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 24 | 48+100% |
| TMUs | 64+14% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 896 KB+1300% |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB | 768 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Tesla C2050 / C2070 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla C2050 / C2070 has 6 GB. The Tesla C2050 / C2070 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 384 KB (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 768 KB (Tesla C2050 / C2070) — the Tesla C2050 / C2070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 6 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB | 768 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 11_0 (Tesla C2050 / C2070). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (FL 11_0)+9% | 11_0 |
| Max Displays | 4+300% | 1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST draws 134W versus the Tesla C2050 / C2070's 238W — a 55.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 350W (Tesla C2050 / C2070). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 248mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 134W-44% | 238W |
| Recommended PSU | 450W | 350W-22% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 248mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 97°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 25.5+77% | 14.4 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST launched at $169 MSRP, while the Tesla C2050 / C2070 launched at $2499. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST costs 93.2% less ($2330 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 20.2 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 1.4 (Tesla C2050 / C2070) — the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST offers 1342.9% better value. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST | Tesla C2050 / C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $169-93% | $2499 |
| Performance per Dollar | 20.2+1343% | 1.4 |
| Codename | GK106 | GF100 |
| Release | March 26 2013 | July 25 2011 |
| Ranking | #551 | #569 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













