GeForce RTX 4050 vs Tesla C2050

Place in the ranking	505	122
Place by popularity	not in top-100	41
Power efficiency	2.40	26.02
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GF100	AD107
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	25 July 2011 (13 years ago)	2023 (1 year ago)

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	448	2560
Core clock speed	574 MHz	2505 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2640 MHz
Number of transistors	3,100 million	18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	238 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.14	211.2
Floating-point processing power	1.028 TFLOPS	13.52 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	32
TMUs	56	80
Tensor Cores	no data	120
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	18

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 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	248 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 12-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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	750 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	144.0 GB/s	216.0 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 DVI	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.0	8.9

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.

Tesla C2050 8.23

RTX 4050 37.43
+355%

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 C2050 3175

RTX 4050 14439
+355%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.23	37.43
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	238 Watt	100 Watt

RTX 4050 has a 354.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 138% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 4050 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla C2050 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla C2050 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 4050 is a desktop one.

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