Radeon R9 M280X vs Tesla C2050
In this comparison between Radeon R9 M280X and Tesla C2050 you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people Radeon R9 M280X will be the best choice, for others Tesla C2050 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Tesla C2050
Radeon R9 M280X is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R9 M280X 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 M280X here:
Main Specs
| Radeon R9 M280X | 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 | Not Listed | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| Check Price |
- Radeon R9 M280X is connected by PCIe 3.0 x16, and Tesla C2050 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 M280X is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2050 - in Desktops.
- Radeon R9 M280X is build with GCN architecture, and Tesla C2050 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of Radeon R9 M280X is 326 MHz higher, than Tesla C2050.
- Radeon R9 M280X is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2050 - by 40 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 340% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Battlefield 5 is 311% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 30−35 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 23% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| 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 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 17% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Dota 2 is 90% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 20−22 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Far Cry 5 is 380% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 2−3 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Fortnite is 182% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 10−12 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | − |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Forza Horizon 4 is 250% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Grand Theft Auto V is 136% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Metro Exodus is 320% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 110−120 |
| ultra / 1080p | 70−75 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Minecraft is 40% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 83% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 214% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 16−18 | 65−70 |
| medium / 768p | 10−12 | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 275% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2050 in World of Tanks is 58% more, than Radeon R9 M280X. | ||
Full Specs
| Radeon R9 M280X | Tesla C2050 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Fermi |
| Code name | Saturn XT | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 February 2015 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 896 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Transistor count | 2,080 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 61.60 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,792 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 3000 MHz | |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | 2.0 | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| Bus support | Not Listed | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 90 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| HD3D | + | |
| PowerTune | + | |
| DualGraphics | + | |
| ZeroCore | + | |
| Switchable graphics | + | |
| Mantle | + | |
| Check Price |