T400 vs Tesla C2075

Place in the ranking	493	472
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.42	21.46
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GF110	TU117
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	25 July 2011 (13 years ago)	6 May 2021 (3 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 cores	448	384
Core clock speed	574 MHz	420 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1425 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	247 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.14	34.20
Floating-point processing power	1.028 TFLOPS	1.094 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	16
TMUs	56	24

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 3.0 x16
Length	248 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	None

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	6 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	783 MHz	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	150.3 GB/s	80 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

3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	2.0	7.5

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 C2075 8.73

T400 9.40
+7.7%

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 C2075 3364

T400 3621
+7.6%

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	8.73	9.40
Recency	25 July 2011	6 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	247 Watt	30 Watt

Tesla C2075 has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T400, on the other hand, has a 7.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 723.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Tesla C2075 and T400.

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