Tesla M2075 vs Radeon Pro W5700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking157not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.26no data
Power efficiency12.79no data
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameNavi 10GF110
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date19 November 2019 (5 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 $2,399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2304448
Core clock speed1243 MHz574 MHz
Boost clock speed1930 MHzno data
Number of transistors10,300 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)205 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate277.932.14
Floating-point processing power8.893 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs14456

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 4.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length305 mm248 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz783 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s150.3 GB/s
Resizable BAR+-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors5x mini-DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-CNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-2.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 November 2019 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 205 Watt 200 Watt

Pro W5700 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

Tesla M2075, on the other hand, has 2.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro W5700 and Tesla M2075. We've got no test results to judge.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro W5700
Radeon Pro W5700
NVIDIA Tesla M2075
Tesla M2075

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.


4 105 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W5700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate Tesla M2075 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro W5700 or Tesla M2075, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.