Radeon RX 5800 vs Tesla C2050

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking503not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.40no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGF100Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date25 July 2011 (13 years ago)no data (2024 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4483072
Core clock speed574 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1735 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)238 Watt275 Watt
Texture fill rate32.14333.1
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS10.66 TFLOPS
ROPs4864
TMUs56192

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 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth144.0 GB/s448.0 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 Connectors1x DVI1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12.0 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.0-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 238 Watt 275 Watt

Tesla C2050 has 15.5% lower power consumption.

RX 5800, on the other hand, has a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Tesla C2050 and Radeon RX 5800. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Tesla C2050 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 5800 is a desktop 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.


NVIDIA Tesla C2050
Tesla C2050
AMD Radeon RX 5800
Radeon RX 5800

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.


4.3 16 votes

Rate Tesla C2050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 111 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5800 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.