FireStream 9270 vs Tesla C2050
If you are going to buy a new graphics card and are choosing between FireStream 9270 and Tesla C2050, there are a couple of things to consider. Cards with more VRAM in general perform better and allow you to play on higher graphics settings. Size also makes a difference. A model with a large heatsink can occupy up to three expansion slots on a motherboard. Be sure you have enough room in your PC case. When comparing GPUs with different architectures, more processing cores and even higher TFLOPS will not always translate to better performance. To help you decide which GPU you need, we have measured frame rates in a number of popular games. For more on how the FireStream 9270 stacks up against Tesla C2050, check out specs charts below.
FireStream 9270
Tesla C2050
Main Specs
| FireStream 9270 | Tesla C2050 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 3 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI | 1x DVI |
- Tesla C2050 has 48% more power consumption, than FireStream 9270.
- Both video cards are using PCIe 2.0 x16 interface connection to a motherboard.
- Tesla C2050 has 1 GB more memory, than FireStream 9270.
- Both cards are used in Desktops.
- FireStream 9270 is build with TeraScale architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of FireStream 9270 is 176 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- FireStream 9270 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Tesla C2050 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FireStream 9270 is 600 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 200% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Battlefield 5 is 184% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 15% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 220−230 |
| medium / 768p | 100−110 | 190−200 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 110−120 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 70−75 |
| 4K / 2160p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 75−80 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 95% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 41% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Dota 2 is 70% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 5−6 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 200% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 55−60 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 142% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 10−12 |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | − |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 193% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 5−6 |
| medium / 720p | 45−50 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 117% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 9−10 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Metro Exodus is 260% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Minecraft is 25% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 14−16 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | − |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 153% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 180% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 21−24 | 65−70 |
| medium / 768p | 14−16 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 200% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in World of Tanks is 47% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
Full Specs
| FireStream 9270 | Tesla C2050 | |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Fermi |
| Code name | RV770 | GF100 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 13 November 2008 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 800 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Transistor count | 956 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 30.00 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,200.0 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3600 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 90 Mh/s | |