Radeon R7 M370 vs Tesla C2050
When comparing Radeon R7 M370 and Tesla C2050, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card - this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between Radeon R7 M370 and Tesla C2050 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.
Tesla C2050
Radeon R7 M370 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R7 M370 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon R7 M370 here:
Main Specs
| Radeon R7 M370 | Tesla C2050 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 238 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| Check Price |
- Radeon R7 M370 is connected by PCIe 3.0 x8, and Tesla C2050 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R7 M370 has 1 GB more memory, than Tesla C2050.
- Radeon R7 M370 is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2050 - in Desktops.
- Radeon R7 M370 is build with GCN architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of Radeon R7 M370 is 301 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- Radeon R7 M370 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2050 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Tesla C2050 is 2000 MHz higher, than Radeon R7 M370.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 175% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 9−10 | 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 Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 10% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| 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 | 27−30 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 75−80 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 87% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 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 34% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 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 76% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 166% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 55−60 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 119% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 10−12 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 175% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 110% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 9−10 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 10−12 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Metro Exodus is 200% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 90−95 | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Minecraft is 25% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 57% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 10−12 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 144% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 21−24 | 65−70 |
| medium / 768p | 16−18 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 176% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 35−40 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in World of Tanks is 34% more, than Radeon R7 M370. | ||
Full Specs
| Radeon R7 M370 | Tesla C2050 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Fermi |
| Code name | Litho | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 6 May 2015 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 384 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 875 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 960 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 690 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 23.04 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 737.3 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 73.6 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 70 Mh/s | 90 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Eyefinity | + | |
| HD3D | + | |
| PowerTune | + | |
| DualGraphics | + | |
| ZeroCore | + | |
| Switchable graphics | + | |
| Mantle | + | |
| Check Price |