AMD Radeon R9 M275X vs NVIDIA Tesla C2075 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R9 M275X compare to the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 in raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X wins the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 11,200 compared to 10,400 for the Tesla C2075. This translates to a 7.7% advantage for the AMD part.

Q: Which GPU has a higher overall benchmark average?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X has an average benchmark score of 10,582, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 averages 10,400. The AMD card sits at the 49th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla sits at the 48th percentile.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 150.3 GB/s bandwidth — more than double the capacity and over double the bandwidth.

Q: How do their architectures differ in terms of manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC, packing 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die. The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 uses the Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm process, also from TSMC, with 3,000 million transistors on a much larger 520 mm² die.

Q: Which card has more shading units and what does that mean for throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X has 640 shading units, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 has 448. The AMD card also achieves higher FP32 performance at 1,184.0 GFLOPS versus 1,027.7 GFLOPS for the Tesla.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 has a TDP of 247 W, requires a 550 W suggested PSU, and uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. The AMD Radeon R9 M275X has no TDP listed in the data, but it is a mobile part while the Tesla is a dual-slot desktop card.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R9 M275X is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using the Venus chip, manufactured on TSMC's 28 nm process. It crams 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF110 chip, built on TSMC's 40 nm process. Its 3,000 million transistors occupy a massive 520 mm² die, giving a density of just 5.8 million per square millimeter — less than half the AMD part's density.

The compute layouts are fundamentally different. AMD's card fields 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. NVIDIA's Tesla counters with 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Despite having fewer shaders, the Tesla has more than triple the ROP count, which helps its pixel rate reach 16.07 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s for the AMD card. Texture rate favors AMD slightly at 37.00 GTexel/s versus 32.14 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is another key divide. The R9 M275X uses a 128-bit GDDR5 interface running at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective), producing 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla C2075 uses a 384-bit GDDR5 interface at 783 MHz (3.1 Gbps effective), yielding 150.3 GB/s — more than double the bandwidth. The Tesla also offers 6 GB of VRAM versus just 2 GB on the AMD card.

API support differs too. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Tesla supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed. The R9 M275X uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Tesla uses the older PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. The Tesla is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm (9.8 inches) in length with one DVI output, while the AMD card's dimensions and display outputs are not specified.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon R9 M275X scores 11,200 against the NVIDIA Tesla C2075's 10,400. That's a 7.7% victory for AMD — a meaningful edge in compute workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the AMD card's average score of 10,582 places it just 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10,629), 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 550X (10,481), 1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10,690), and 1.7% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10,761). The Tesla C2075's average of 10,400 puts it 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6500M (10,362), 0.8% behind the RX 550X (10,481), 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A (10,273), and notably 1.7% behind the very card it's being compared against here — the R9 M275X.

The delta percentages tell a consistent story. When the Tesla is compared to the R9 M275X in the nearest rivals list, it shows a -1.7% delta, meaning it trails the AMD card. Conversely, the R9 M275X's rival list shows the Tesla at -1.7% delta, confirming the same relationship from the other direction. The AMD part wins the head-to-head count 1 to 0.

The Verdict

The data makes this straightforward: the AMD Radeon R9 M275X is the faster card in compute performance. It leads the Geekbench OpenCL test by 7.7%, has a higher average benchmark score (10,582 vs 10,400), and sits at a higher percentile (49th vs 48th). If your priority is raw OpenCL compute, the AMD card is the choice.

However, the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 has clear advantages in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 6 GB frame buffer and 150.3 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the AMD card's 2 GB and 72.00 GB/s. For workloads that need large datasets in VRAM or heavy memory throughput, the Tesla's architecture is better suited despite its lower compute scores. The Tesla also has a much higher pixel rate (16.07 GPixel/s vs 14.80 GPixel/s) thanks to its 48 ROPs, which could matter for certain rendering tasks.

The choice depends on workload. For general compute and OpenCL performance, the AMD card wins. For memory-bound tasks or those requiring large frame buffers, the Tesla's 3x memory capacity and 2.09x bandwidth make it the practical pick. The Tesla is also a desktop card with a 247 W TDP and specific power requirements, while the AMD part appears to be a mobile solution — the form factor alone may dictate your decision.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M275X | NVIDIA Tesla C2075 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Chip | Venus | GF110 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 520 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 5.8M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 150.3 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 783 MHz (3.1 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 640 | 448 |

| TMUs | 40 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 16.07 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.00 GTexel/s | 32.14 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,184.0 GFLOPS | 1,027.7 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not specified | 247 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 550 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Not specified | 1x DVI |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2014-01-27 | 2011-07-24 |

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon R9 M275X wins in: OpenCL compute performance (11,200 vs 10,400, a 7.7% lead), overall average benchmark score (10,582 vs 10,400), FP32 throughput (1,184.0 GFLOPS vs 1,027.7 GFLOPS), texture fill rate (37.00 GTexel/s vs 32.14 GTexel/s), shading unit count (640 vs 448), transistor density (12.2M/mm² vs 5.8M/mm²), and process efficiency with its 28 nm node versus 40 nm. It also supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and a newer PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, plus a more recent DirectX feature level (11_1 vs 11_0).

NVIDIA Tesla C2075 wins in: Memory capacity (6 GB vs 2 GB — three times more), memory bandwidth (150.3 GB/s vs 72.00 GB/s — 2.09 times more), memory bus width (384 bit vs 128 bit), ROP count (48 vs 16), pixel rate (16.07 GPixel/s vs 14.80 GPixel/s), TMU count (56 vs 40), and total transistor count (3,000 million vs 1,500 million). It's also a dual-slot desktop card with defined power requirements, whereas the AMD card's power specs are not listed.

For builders targeting compute-heavy tasks that fit within 2 GB of VRAM, the AMD card is the clear performer. For workloads needing large datasets in memory or memory-bandwidth-intensive operations, the Tesla's superior memory subsystem makes it the more practical option despite its compute deficit.