Tesla C2050 vs Radeon RX 460

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 460 with Tesla C2050, including specs and performance data.

RX 460
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
10.63
+29.2%

RX 460 outperforms Tesla C2050 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking429503
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.12no data
Power efficiency9.842.40
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameBaffinGF100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date8 August 2016 (8 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores896448
Core clock speed1090 MHz574 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 million3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt238 Watt
Texture fill rate67.2032.14
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs5656

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 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Length170 mm248 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB3 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz750 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s144.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RX 460 10.63
+29.2%
Tesla C2050 8.23

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.

RX 460 4101
+29.2%
Tesla C2050 3175

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 HD39
+30%
30−35
−30%
1440p29
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
4K18
+50%
12−14
−50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 34
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+42%
50−55
−42%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+45%
40−45
−45%
Metro Exodus 44
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+35%
40−45
−35%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 22
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+29.2%
24−27
−29.2%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+42%
50−55
−42%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+45%
40−45
−45%
Metro Exodus 35
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+36.7%
30−33
−36.7%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 36
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 25
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 13
+30%
10−11
−30%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

This is how RX 460 and Tesla C2050 compete in popular games:

  • RX 460 is 30% faster in 1080p
  • RX 460 is 38% faster in 1440p
  • RX 460 is 50% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.63 8.23
Recency 8 August 2016 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 238 Watt

RX 460 has a 29.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 217.3% lower power consumption.

Tesla C2050, on the other hand, has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Radeon RX 460 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla C2050 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 460 is a desktop card while Tesla C2050 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 RX 460
Radeon RX 460
NVIDIA Tesla C2050
Tesla C2050

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 1018 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 16 votes

Rate Tesla C2050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.