Radeon R9 M275 vs Tesla C2050
When choosing between Radeon R9 M275 and Tesla C2050, 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 Radeon R9 M275 and Tesla C2050.
Tesla C2050
Radeon R9 M275 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M275 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 R9 M275 here:
Main Specs
| Radeon R9 M275 | Tesla C2050 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 238 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | 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 R9 M275 is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Tesla C2050 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 M275 has 1 GB more memory, than Tesla C2050.
- Radeon R9 M275 is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2050 - in Desktops.
- Radeon R9 M275 is build with GCN architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of Radeon R9 M275 is 351 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- Radeon R9 M275 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2050 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon R9 M275 is 1500 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 275% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Battlefield 5 is 362% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 50−55 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 4% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 110−120 | 220−230 |
| medium / 768p | 90−95 | 190−200 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 110−120 |
| QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 70−75 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 65−70 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 121% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 50−55 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 25% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Dota 2 is 94% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 10−12 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 520% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 200% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 322% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| medium / 720p | 35−40 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 163% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 9−10 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 7−8 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Metro Exodus is 350% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 70−75 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Minecraft is 32% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 94% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 187% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 16−18 | 65−70 |
| medium / 768p | 12−14 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 260% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 30−33 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in World of Tanks is 47% more, than Radeon R9 M275. | ||
Full Specs
| Radeon R9 M275 | Tesla C2050 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Fermi |
| Code name | Venus | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 August 2014 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 640 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 37.00 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,184 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 122 Mh/s | 90 Mh/s |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Check Price |