Tesla C1080 vs TITAN RTX
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 67 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.11 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 12.05 | no data |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | TU102 | GT200B |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 18 December 2018 (6 years ago) | 9 April 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 4608 | 240 |
| Core clock speed | 1350 MHz | 610 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1770 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 18,600 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 188 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 509.8 | 48.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | 16.31 TFLOPS | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96 | 32 |
| TMUs | 288 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | 576 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 72 | no data |
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 | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 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 | GDDR6 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 24 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 512 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 672.0 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |
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 Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 1.3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 18 December 2018 | 9 April 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 24 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 188 Watt |
TITAN RTX has an age advantage of 9 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.
Tesla C1080, on the other hand, has 48.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between TITAN RTX and Tesla C1080. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that TITAN RTX is a desktop card while Tesla C1080 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
