AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 450 and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result: in Geekbench OpenCL, the Tesla C2070 scores 9716 against the Radeon Pro 450’s 9002, giving NVIDIA a 7.3% lead. However, this narrow victory masks a much larger story about efficiency, capability, and intended use cases. The Radeon Pro 450, built on a 14nm process, achieves nearly the same raw compute performance while consuming only a fraction of the power, whereas the Tesla C2070 is a 40nm behemoth designed for a different era of computing. The benchmark results indicate that while the Tesla wins the single OpenCL test, the broader picture is far more nuanced, with each card winning in distinct scenarios that go beyond a single score.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 450. The Tesla scores 9716 points, while the Radeon Pro 450 manages 9002 points, resulting in a 7.3% advantage for NVIDIA. This is a modest margin, especially considering the architectural gap between the two. The Tesla C2070’s score of 9716 places it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, just below the Radeon Pro 450’s 49th percentile ranking. Interestingly, the Tesla’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla M10, which scores 9724, a negligible 0.1% difference. This suggests the C2070 is performing at the expected level for its class, despite its age.

The Radeon Pro 450, despite losing this particular test, shows a more balanced overall profile. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 10804, which is higher than the Tesla’s 9716. This average is pulled up by strong showings in Geekbench Metal (12893) and Geekbench Vulkan (10518), tests that the Tesla C2070 does not participate in. The Radeon’s OpenCL score of 9002 is its weakest result, but its other scores demonstrate significant versatility. In fact, the Radeon Pro 450’s average score of 10804 puts it in the company of the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10761, a 0.4% difference) and the GeForce MX350 (10883, a 0.7% difference). The Tesla C2070, by contrast, has no other benchmark data, meaning its 9716 OpenCL score is its sole data point. This disparity in available test results makes the head-to-head comparison incomplete, but the data we have shows a clear, if narrow, win for the Tesla in OpenCL.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is vast. The AMD Radeon Pro 450 is built on the Baffin chip using the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14nm process at GlobalFoundries. In contrast, the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 uses the GF100 chip with the Fermi architecture, fabricated on a much older 40nm process at TSMC. This process difference is stark: the Radeon packs 3,000 million transistors into a die size of just 123 mm², achieving a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The Tesla, meanwhile, contains 3,100 million transistors across a massive 529 mm² die, yielding a density of only 5.9 million per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro 450 is over four times denser in terms of transistor packing, evidence of five years of manufacturing progress.

The compute configurations diverge significantly. The Radeon Pro 450 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Tesla C2070 has fewer shading units at 448, but more TMUs at 56 and triple the ROPs at 48. This gives the Tesla a higher pixel rate of 16.07 GPixel/s compared to the Radeon’s 12.80 GPixel/s. Texture rates are nearly identical, with the Tesla at 32.14 GTexel/s and the Radeon at 32.00 GTexel/s. In terms of raw FP32 throughput, the two are essentially tied: the Radeon Pro 450 delivers 1,024.0 GFLOPS, while the Tesla C2070 delivers 1,027.7 GFLOPS. However, the Radeon supports FP16 at 1,024.0 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, a feature entirely absent on the Tesla. Memory systems also differ widely, with the Radeon using 2GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus for 81.28 GB/s bandwidth, while the Tesla uses 6GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus for 143.4 GB/s. The Tesla also has a much older PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, compared to the Radeon’s PCIe 3.0 x8.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the data, the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 wins in scenarios that demand raw memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 6GB of VRAM is triple the Radeon’s 2GB, and its 143.4 GB/s bandwidth is 76% higher. This makes the Tesla the clear choice for workloads that require large datasets to reside in video memory, such as certain scientific simulations or data-parallel compute tasks where the 384-bit bus can shine. The Tesla also wins on pixel throughput, with 16.07 GPixel/s versus the Radeon’s 12.80 GPixel/s, suggesting an advantage in fill-rate-bound operations. Its 48 ROPs, three times that of the Radeon, further reinforces this strength.

The AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins in every other measurable category. Its 14nm process gives it a staggering efficiency advantage, with a 35W TDP compared to the Tesla’s 238W. This is not a minor difference; the Tesla requires a 550W suggested PSU and dual-slot cooling with 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors, while the Radeon is an MXM module with no external power connectors. The Radeon also supports modern APIs that the Tesla lacks. It has DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 support, while the Tesla only manages DirectX 12 (11_0) and no Vulkan at all. The Radeon’s FP16 capability is a significant advantage for machine learning and media workloads, and its higher average benchmark score of 10804 versus 9716 indicates better all-around performance in the tests that were run. The Radeon Pro 450 is the clear winner for mobile or compact systems, modern API compatibility, and energy-conscious deployments.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 has an average benchmark score of 10804, which is higher than the NVIDIA Tesla C2070’s 9716. The Radeon’s score is buoyed by its Metal and Vulkan results, which are not available for the Tesla.

Q: In the only head-to-head test, what is the exact performance difference?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 scores 9716, while the AMD Radeon Pro 450 scores 9002. This gives the Tesla a 7.3% lead over the Radeon.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The Tesla C2070 has 6GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 143.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 450 has 2GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern APIs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA Tesla C2070 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support.

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 has a TDP of 35W, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 has a TDP of 238W.

Q: How does the transistor density compare?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 has a transistor density of 24.4 million per mm², based on 3,000 million transistors in a 123 mm² die. The Tesla C2070 has a density of 5.9 million per mm², with 3,100 million transistors in a 529 mm² die.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split decision. For compute-bound workloads that leverage OpenCL and require large memory capacity, the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 is the better choice. Its 6GB frame buffer and 143.4 GB/s bandwidth are substantial advantages, and its 7.3% lead in OpenCL performance demonstrates that its older Fermi architecture can still hold its own in specific tasks. The Tesla’s higher pixel rate and ROP count also make it suitable for certain fill-rate-limited operations. However, this comes at an enormous cost in power and physical size, with a 238W TDP and dual-slot cooling.

For nearly everything else, the AMD Radeon Pro 450 is the superior product. It offers a 35W TDP, an MXM form factor, and support for modern APIs like Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0). Its FP16 support opens up workloads that the Tesla simply cannot perform. The Radeon’s higher average benchmark score of 10804 versus 9716 indicates better overall performance in the broader suite of tests. The Radeon’s 49th percentile ranking versus the Tesla’s 47th also suggests it is the more competitive card in today’s landscape. The verdict is straightforward: the Tesla C2070 is a specialist tool for large-memory compute tasks, while the Radeon Pro 450 is a generalist that wins on efficiency, modern features, and overall versatility.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 450 | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Baffin | GF100 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Fermi |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 3,100 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) | 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 81.28 GB/s | 143.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 448 |

| TMUs | 40 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.80 GPixel/s | 16.07 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 32.00 GTexel/s | 32.14 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,024.0 GFLOPS | 1,027.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 35 W | 238 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | null | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | null | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | null |

| Release Date | 2016-10-29 | 2011-07-24 |