Radeon Graphics 512SP vs Tesla C2075

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking486not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.44no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF110Renoir
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date25 July 2011 (13 years ago)7 March 2020 (4 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 cores448512
Core clock speed574 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2100 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)247 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate32.1467.20
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS2.15 TFLOPS
ROPs488
TMUs5632

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 x16IGP
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount6 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed783 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DVIMotherboard Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.7 (6.4)
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 25 July 2011 7 March 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 247 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics 512SP has an age advantage of 8 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1546.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Tesla C2075 and Radeon Graphics 512SP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Tesla C2075 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon Graphics 512SP 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 C2075
Tesla C2075
AMD Radeon Graphics 512SP
Radeon Graphics 512SP

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.


3.1 29 votes

Rate Tesla C2075 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 77 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 512SP 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.