FireStream 9270 vs Tesla C2070
When choosing between FireStream 9270 and Tesla C2070, it is worth examining the specifications of the models in detail. Do they meet the recommended requirements of modern games and software? Storage capacity, form factor, TDP, available ports, warranty and manufacturer support are all important. For example, the size of a PC case can limit the maximum thickness and length of the card. Often, instead of the factory overclocked card and RGB backlight, it is better to choose a reference model with a more efficient GPU. And make sure that your current power supply unit has the correct connection pins (using adapters is not recommended). This GPUs compare tool is meant to help you to choose the best graphics card for your build. Let's find out the difference between FireStream 9270 and Tesla C2070.
FireStream 9270
Tesla C2070
Main Specs
| FireStream 9270 | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI | 1x DVI |
- Tesla C2070 has 48% more power consumption, than FireStream 9270.
- Both video cards are using PCIe 2.0 x16 interface connection to a motherboard.
- Tesla C2070 has 4 GB more memory, than FireStream 9270.
- Both cards are used in Desktops.
- FireStream 9270 is build with TeraScale architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of FireStream 9270 is 176 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- FireStream 9270 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Tesla C2070 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FireStream 9270 is 612 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 183% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Battlefield 5 is 169% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 11% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 100−110 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 75−80 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 83% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 38% 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 C2070 in Dota 2 is 70% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 5−6 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Far Cry 5 is 175% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 55−60 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Fortnite is 132% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 10−11 |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | − |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Forza Horizon 4 is 160% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | − | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 3−4 |
| medium / 720p | 45−50 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Grand Theft Auto V is 100% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Metro Exodus is 220% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 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 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 146% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 140% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
| low / 768p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 180% 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 C2070 in World of Tanks is 47% more, than FireStream 9270. | ||
Full Specs
| FireStream 9270 | Tesla C2070 | |
| 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 | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 143.4 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 | |