GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER vs Tesla C2075

Place in performance ranking	463	8
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.39	33.11
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Ada Lovelace
GPU code name	GF110	AD104
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	25 July 2011 (12 years ago)	17 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$699
Current price	$2237	$719 (1x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 4070 SUPER has 8390% better value for money than Tesla C2075.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	448	7168
Core clock speed	574 MHz	1980 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2475 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	247 Watt	220 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.14	584.6
Floating-point performance	1,030.4 gflops	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 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	248 mm	285 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 16-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	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	3132 MHz	21000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	150.3 GB/s	504.2 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	no data	+

API compatibility

List of supported graphics 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 performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 C2075 8.71

RTX 4070 SUPER 77.64
+791%

GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER outperforms Tesla C2075 by 791% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Tesla C2075 3364

RTX 4070 SUPER 29984
+791%

GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER outperforms Tesla C2075 by 791% in Passmark.

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 HD	21−24 −890%	208 +890%
1440p	14−16 −871%	136 +871%
4K	9−10 −822%	83 +822%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −925%	120−130 +925%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −893%	130−140 +893%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −804%	240−250 +804%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −883%	110−120 +883%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −824%	190−200 +824%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −892%	230−240 +892%
Hitman 3	12−14 −925%	120−130 +925%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −837%	300−350 +837%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −819%	140−150 +819%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −933%	120−130 +933%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 −864%	434 +864%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 −839%	169 +839%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −925%	120−130 +925%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −893%	130−140 +893%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −804%	240−250 +804%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −883%	110−120 +883%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −824%	190−200 +824%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −892%	230−240 +892%
Hitman 3	12−14 −925%	120−130 +925%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −837%	300−350 +837%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −819%	140−150 +819%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −933%	120−130 +933%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 −851%	428 +851%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −816%	412 +816%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −914%	140−150 +914%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −925%	120−130 +925%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −893%	130−140 +893%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −900%	120−130 +900%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −883%	110−120 +883%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −892%	230−240 +892%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −837%	300−350 +837%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 −853%	381 +853%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −857%	201 +857%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −893%	139 +893%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−933%

120−130
+933%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −822%	160−170 +822%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 −800%	140−150 +800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −820%	90−95 +820%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −825%	110−120 +825%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −917%	183 +917%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −833%	190−200 +833%
Hitman 3	12−14 −850%	110−120 +850%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −881%	200−210 +881%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −933%	120−130 +933%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −881%	265 +881%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −863%	154 +863%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 −800%	108 +800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−917%

120−130
+917%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −878%	85−90 +878%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −886%	65−70 +886%
Hitman 3	7−8 −900%	70−75 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −793%	120−130 +793%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −840%	94 +840%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −850%	133 +850%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −857%	65−70 +857%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 −814%	60−65 +814%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −940%	50−55 +940%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −825%	140−150 +825%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −793%	120−130 +793%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −850%	95−100 +850%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 −933%	62 +933%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−800%

90−95
+800%

This is how Tesla C2075 and RTX 4070 SUPER compete in popular games:

RTX 4070 SUPER is 890% faster in 1080p
RTX 4070 SUPER is 871% faster in 1440p
RTX 4070 SUPER is 822% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.71	77.64
Recency	25 July 2011	17 January 2024
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	247 Watt	220 Watt