Arc B580 vs Tesla C2075

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla C2075 with Arc B580, including specs and performance data.

Tesla C2075
2011
6 GB GDDR5, 247 Watt
8.07

B580 outperforms C2075 by a whopping 377% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking569138
Place by popularitynot in top-10071
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data91.50
Power efficiency2.5315.68
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Xe2 (2024)
GPU code nameGF110BMG-G21
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date25 July 2011 (15 years ago)13 December 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores4482560
Core clock speed574 MHz2670 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2670 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million19,600 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)247 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate32.14427.2
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS13.67 TFLOPS
ROPs4880
TMUs56160
Tensor Coresno data160
Ray Tracing Coresno data20
L1 Cache896 KB5 MB
L2 Cache768 KB18 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length248 mm272 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB12 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed783 MHz2375 MHz
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/s456.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.4
CUDA2.0-
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Tesla C2075 8.07
Arc B580 38.50
+377%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Tesla C2075 3364
Samples: 12
Arc B580 16038
+377%
Samples: 3569

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD24−27
−392%
118
+392%
1440p12−14
−425%
63
+425%
4K8−9
−388%
39
+388%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.11
1440pno data3.95
4Kno data6.38

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 112
+0%
112
+0%
Palworld 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 177
+0%
177
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 97
+0%
97
+0%
Far Cry 5 173
+0%
173
+0%
Fortnite 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Palworld 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 82
+0%
82
+0%
Far Cry 5 160
+0%
160
+0%
Fortnite 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 140
+0%
140
+0%
Metro Exodus 106
+0%
106
+0%
Palworld 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 236
+0%
236
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 77
+0%
77
+0%
Far Cry 5 149
+0%
149
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85
+0%
85
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Palworld 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 69
+0%
69
+0%
Metro Exodus 62
+0%
62
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 56
+0%
56
+0%
Far Cry 5 110
+0%
110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+0%
68
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Palworld 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 78
+0%
78
+0%
Metro Exodus 46
+0%
46
+0%
Palworld 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
+0%
84
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Palworld 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how Tesla C2075 and Arc B580 compete in popular games:

  • Arc B580 is 392% faster in 1080p
  • Arc B580 is 425% faster in 1440p
  • Arc B580 is 388% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.07 38.50
Recency 25 July 2011 13 December 2024
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 247 Watt 190 Watt

Arc B580 has a 377% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 30% lower power consumption.

The Arc B580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla C2075 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla C2075 is a workstation graphics card while Arc B580 is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 29 votes

Rate Tesla C2075 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1434 votes

Rate Arc B580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla C2075 or Arc B580, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.