Tesla S2050 vs Radeon HD 6950
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 637 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.97 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.41 | no data |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 (2010−2013) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Cayman | GF100 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 14 December 2010 (15 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | $11,999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1408 | 448 ×4 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 574 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,640 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 500 Watt | 900 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 70.40 | 32.14 ×4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.253 TFLOPS | 1.028 TFLOPS ×4 |
| ROPs | 32 | 48 ×4 |
| TMUs | 88 | 56 ×4 |
| L1 Cache | 352 KB | 896 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 768 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 3 GB ×4 |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit ×4 |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 773 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 148.4 GB/s ×4 |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 14 December 2010 | 25 July 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 3 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 500 Watt | 900 Watt |
HD 6950 has 80% lower power consumption.
Tesla S2050, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 months, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.
We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6950 and Tesla S2050. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6950 is a desktop graphics card while Tesla S2050 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
