Radeon HD 8750M vs Tesla C2070
In this comparison between Radeon HD 8750M and Tesla C2070 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 HD 8750M will be the best choice, for others Tesla C2070 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Tesla C2070
Radeon HD 8750M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon HD 8750M 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 HD 8750M here:
Main Specs
| Radeon HD 8750M | Tesla C2070 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 238 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5, DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| Check Price |
- Radeon HD 8750M is connected by PCIe 3.0 x8, and Tesla C2070 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Tesla C2070 has 4 GB more memory, than Radeon HD 8750M.
- Radeon HD 8750M is used in Laptops, and Tesla C2070 - in Desktops.
- Radeon HD 8750M is build with GCN architecture, and Tesla C2070 - with Fermi.
- Core clock speed of Radeon HD 8750M is 46 MHz higher, than Tesla C2070.
- Radeon HD 8750M is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Tesla C2070 - by 40 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Tesla C2070 is 988 MHz higher, than Radeon HD 8750M.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 10−12 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 350% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 30−33 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Battlefield 5 is 516% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Radeon HD 8750M and Tesla C2070 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 110−120 | 210−220 |
| medium / 768p | 85−90 | 180−190 |
| ultra / 1080p | 35−40 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 60−65 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 55−60 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 126% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 22% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Dota 2 is 120% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 20−22 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 9−10 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Far Cry 5 is 550% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 45−50 | 100−110 |
| medium / 1080p | 7−8 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Fortnite is 233% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 55−60 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Forza Horizon 4 is 457% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 40−45 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | − | 80−85 |
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 30−35 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| medium / 720p | 30−35 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Grand Theft Auto V is 187% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 2−3 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Metro Exodus is 850% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 55−60 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Minecraft is 32% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 88% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 3−4 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 600% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 7−8 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 6−7 | 35−40 |
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 700% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 27−30 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Tesla C2070 in World of Tanks is 67% more, than Radeon HD 8750M. | ||
Full Specs
| Radeon HD 8750M | Tesla C2070 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Fermi |
| Code name | Mars Pro | GF100 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 16 November 2012 | 25 July 2011 |
| Pipelines | 384 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 620 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 950 million | 3,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 18.60 | 32.14 |
| Floating-point performance | 595.2 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Length | 248 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 - 4000 MHz | 2988 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 143.4 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) | 71 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Check Price |