AMD Radeon R9 M375X vs NVIDIA Tesla C2075 Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark database contains a single direct comparison between these two GPUs, and it heavily favors the NVIDIA Tesla C2075. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Tesla C2075 scores 10,400 points against the AMD Radeon R9 M375X's 8,273 points. That is a 25.7% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a substantial margin that places the two products in different performance tiers despite their overlapping market positioning.

The Tesla C2075's score of 10,400 places it at the 48th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 10,362 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 550X scores 10,481 (0.8% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A scores 10,273 (1.2% behind), and the AMD Radeon R9 M275X scores 10,582 (1.7% ahead). This clustering indicates that the Tesla C2075 sits at a competitive performance plateau, with no single rival more than 2% away in either direction.

Meanwhile, the AMD Radeon R9 M375X's OpenCL score of 8,273 places it at the 43rd percentile. Its nearest rivals also form a tight band: the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 scores 8,265 (0.7% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX scores 8,427 (1.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon 880M scores 8,436 (1.3% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8,458 (1.6% ahead). The R9 M375X is essentially at parity with the K1200, while trailing the other three by modest margins.

The R9 M375X does have a second benchmark entry: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 8,377. This is slightly higher than its OpenCL result, suggesting the architecture handles Vulkan workloads marginally better than OpenCL. The Tesla C2075 has no Vulkan entry in the database, so no cross-API comparison is possible.

The 25.7% OpenCL gap between the two GPUs is significant. To put it in context, the Tesla C2075's closest rival in the database is only 1.7% away, meaning the entire competitive cluster around it would still be roughly 23-27% ahead of the R9 M375X. The AMD part's own rival cluster, however, is much closer to its score, with deltas of 0.7% to 1.6%. This indicates that the R9 M375X is competitive with its direct peers, but the Tesla C2075 operates in a distinctly higher performance band.

# Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a decisive 25.7% margin. This is the sole direct comparison in the database, so the Tesla C2075 claims 1 win and the R9 M375X claims 0 wins. The result suggests that for general compute workloads via OpenCL, the Tesla C2075 is the stronger option, particularly for tasks that can leverage its larger memory pool and wider memory bus.

The AMD Radeon R9 M375X, despite losing the OpenCL comparison, shows a notable strength in Vulkan performance. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 8,377 exceeds its OpenCL score of 8,273 by 104 points, or roughly 1.3%. This indicates that the GCN 1.0 architecture, with its explicit Vulkan driver support (version 1.2.170), handles modern graphics APIs efficiently. For users prioritizing Vulkan-based workloads, the R9 M375X may be the more appropriate choice, though no direct Vulkan comparison with the Tesla C2075 exists in the database.

From a use-case perspective, the Tesla C2075 is positioned for compute-heavy tasks. Its 6 GB of GDDR5 memory and 384-bit bus provide 150.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than double the R9 M375X's 72.00 GB/s. This makes the Tesla part better suited for large datasets, scientific computing, and memory-intensive workloads. The R9 M375X, with 2 GB of memory and a 128-bit bus, is more constrained in this regard, though its higher boost clock of 1015 MHz and greater FP32 throughput of 1,299.2 GFLOPS (compared to the Tesla's 1,027.7 GFLOPS) may offer advantages in compute tasks that are not memory-bound.

The architecture records also show a difference in API support. The R9 M375X supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Tesla C2075 has no Vulkan entry in the database. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, though the Tesla's DirectX 12 support is limited to feature level 11_0, while the R9 M375X supports feature level 11_1. For modern gaming workloads, the R9 M375X has a slight edge in API coverage.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 uses the GF110 chip based on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.8 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a large, power-hungry chip from an earlier era of GPU design.

The AMD Radeon R9 M375X uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0, manufactured on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 1,500 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The 28 nm process allows more than double the transistor density compared to the 40 nm process, which is a clear generational advantage.

The shader configurations differ substantially. The Tesla C2075 has 448 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The R9 M375X has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The AMD part has 43% more shading units, which explains its higher FP32 throughput of 1,299.2 GFLOPS versus the Tesla's 1,027.7 GFLOPS. However, the Tesla's ROP count is three times higher, and its TMU count is 40% higher, which contributes to its pixel rate of 16.07 GPixel/s (nearly identical to the R9 M375X's 16.24 GPixel/s) and its texture rate of 32.14 GTexel/s (lower than the R9 M375X's 40.60 GTexel/s).

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Tesla C2075 uses a 384-bit memory bus with 6 GB of GDDR5, delivering 150.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M375X uses a 128-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5, delivering only 72.00 GB/s. The Tesla's memory subsystem has more than double the bandwidth and triple the capacity, which is critical for large working sets and high-resolution textures.

The Tesla C2075 is a dual-slot card with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, requiring a 550 W power supply. Its thermal design power is 247 W. The R9 M375X has no TDP, slot width, or power connector data in the database, reflecting its likely status as a mobile or compact desktop part with lower power requirements. The Tesla also uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the R9 M375X uses PCIe 3.0 x16, offering double the bus bandwidth for data transfers.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla C2075 | AMD Radeon R9 M375X |

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

| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

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

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 123 mm² |

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

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 128 bit |

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

| Shading Units | 448 | 640 |

| TMUs | 56 | 40 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 16.07 GPixel/s | 16.24 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 32.14 GTexel/s | 40.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,027.7 GFLOPS | 1,299.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 247 W | N/A |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | N/A |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | N/A |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | N/A |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI | N/A |

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

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2011-07-24 | 2015-05-04 |

The release dates show a four-year gap, with the Tesla C2075 launching in July 2011 and the R9 M375X in May 2015. The Tesla is part of the Tesla Fermi generation (x20xx series), while the R9 M375X belongs to the Gem System (R9 M300) generation. The Tesla's predecessor is Tesla, and its successor is Tesla Kepler. The R9 M375X's predecessor is Solar System, and its successor is Polaris Mobile.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla C2075 scores 10,400 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8,273. This gives the Tesla a 25.7% advantage.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The Tesla C2075 has a 384-bit memory bus with 6 GB of GDDR5, delivering 150.3 GB/s. The R9 M375X has a 128-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5, delivering 72.00 GB/s. The Tesla has more than double the bandwidth and triple the memory capacity.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M375X support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the R9 M375X supports Vulkan version 1.2.170. The Tesla C2075 has no Vulkan support listed in the database.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for each GPU?

A: The Tesla C2075 delivers 1,027.7 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the R9 M375X delivers 1,299.2 GFLOPS. The AMD part has approximately 26% higher FP32 throughput.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of shading units?

A: The R9 M375X has 640 shading units, while the Tesla C2075 has 448. The AMD part has 43% more shading units, which contributes to its higher compute throughput.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two products?

A: The Tesla C2075 was released on July 24, 2011, while the R9 M375X was released on May 4, 2015. The AMD part is nearly four years newer in the database records.