Tesla C2075 vs UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) with Tesla C2075, including specs and performance data.
Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) outperforms C2075 by an impressive 56% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 443 | 569 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 64.93 | 2.53 |
| Architecture | no data | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Rocket Lake GT1 | GF110 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 30 March 2021 (5 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (15 years ago) |
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 | no data | 448 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 574 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 247 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 32.14 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 1.028 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 56 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 896 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 248 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin + 1x 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 type | no data | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 783 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 150.3 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
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 | no data | 1x DVI |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 2.0 |
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 HD | 12
+71.4%
| 7−8
−71.4%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+75%
|
40−45
−75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| Palworld | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 24−27
+62.5%
|
16−18
−62.5%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+60%
|
35−40
−60%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+75%
|
40−45
−75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Fortnite | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+80%
|
30−33
−80%
|
| Palworld | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+57.1%
|
70−75
−57.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+60%
|
35−40
−60%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+75%
|
40−45
−75%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 170−180
+61.8%
|
110−120
−61.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| Dota 2 | 27
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Fortnite | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+80%
|
30−33
−80%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Palworld | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+57.1%
|
21−24
−57.1%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+57.1%
|
70−75
−57.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+60%
|
35−40
−60%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| Dota 2 | 25
+56.3%
|
16−18
−56.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+80%
|
30−33
−80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+57.1%
|
21−24
−57.1%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+57.1%
|
70−75
−57.1%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 70−75
+64.4%
|
45−50
−64.4%
|
| Palworld | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+71.4%
|
14−16
−71.4%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 95−100
+58.3%
|
60−65
−58.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
+58.3%
|
12−14
−58.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90
+70%
|
50−55
−70%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+65.3%
|
75−80
−65.3%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+66.7%
|
21−24
−66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+68.8%
|
16−18
−68.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+72.2%
|
18−20
−72.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+80%
|
10−11
−80%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 27−30
+75%
|
16−18
−75%
|
| Palworld | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+71.4%
|
14−16
−71.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Palworld | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+71.4%
|
35−40
−71.4%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+80%
|
10−11
−80%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+70.4%
|
27−30
−70.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+62.5%
|
8−9
−62.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+57.1%
|
14−16
−57.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Palworld | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
This is how UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) and Tesla C2075 compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is 71% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.59 | 8.07 |
| Recency | 30 March 2021 | 25 July 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 247 Watt |
UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) has a 56% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 186% more advanced lithography process, and 1547% lower power consumption.
The UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla C2075 in performance tests.
Be aware that UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is a notebook graphics card while Tesla C2075 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.
