AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single direct benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 550 and the NVIDIA Tesla C2070, and it is a clear win for the AMD part. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 550 scores 11,063 points, while the Tesla C2070 scores 9,716 points. That translates to a 13.9% advantage for the RX 550, a substantial lead in a compute-oriented workload that should favor the older Tesla's design philosophy.

The RX 550's victory in this test is notable given the Tesla C2070's lineage. The C2070 was designed as a compute accelerator, and its 448 shading units and 6 GB of memory suggest a focus on throughput and capacity. Yet the RX 550, with 512 shading units and a much newer architecture, manages to outpace it by a healthy margin. The delta of 13.9% is not a marginal edge; it is a decisive gap in raw OpenCL performance.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the significance of this result. The RX 550's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 11,075, placing it at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q at 11,088 (a 0.1% difference) and the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225 (where the RX 550 trails by 1.3%). The Tesla C2070, by contrast, has an average score of 9,716, sitting at the 47th percentile. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA Tesla M10 at 9,724 (0.1% behind) and the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 at 9,665 (where the C2070 leads by 0.5%). These figures show that the RX 550 and the C2070 occupy different performance tiers, with the AMD card consistently operating at a higher level.

The head-to-head result also highlights the generational gap. The RX 550's 13.9% lead in OpenCL is not just a single data point; it aligns with its overall average score being 1,359 points higher than the C2070's (11,075 versus 9,716). This is a consistent pattern across the board, not a fluke of one benchmark. For the Tesla C2070, this represents a significant deficit, especially considering its much larger physical footprint and power draw, which are discussed in the architecture section.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by more than just release date; they represent fundamentally different design eras. The AMD Radeon RX 550 uses the Lexa chip, built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, and belongs to the Polaris (RX 500) generation. It is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 2,200 million transistors packed into a 103 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter, a figure that reflects the miniaturization advances of its time.

The NVIDIA Tesla C2070, in contrast, uses the GF100 chip with the Fermi architecture, part of the Tesla Fermi (x20xx) generation. It is built on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with 3,100 million transistors spread across a much larger 529 mm² die. Its transistor density is just 5.9 million per square millimeter, a stark contrast to the RX 550. The C2070's die is over five times larger, yet it packs fewer transistors per area, illustrating the efficiency leap of the newer process node.

Memory configurations also differ sharply. The RX 550 offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The Tesla C2070 provides 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, with a memory clock of 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 143.4 GB/s. The C2070's wider bus gives it higher total bandwidth, but the RX 550's faster memory clock partially compensates. The C2070's 6 GB capacity is a clear advantage for large datasets, but its bandwidth advantage is only 28% (143.4 versus 112.0 GB/s), a smaller margin than its capacity lead might suggest.

Core counts and throughput figures tell a nuanced story. The RX 550 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). Its pixel rate is 18.93 GPixel/s, texture rate is 37.86 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 1,211.4 GFLOPS. It also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, delivering 1,211.4 GFLOPS in half precision. The Tesla C2070 has 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 16.07 GPixel/s, texture rate is 32.14 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 1,027.7 GFLOPS. The C2070 has no FP16 support listed. Despite having fewer shading units, the C2070 has more TMUs and ROPs, which could benefit texture-heavy or fill-rate-bound tasks, but its FP32 output is 15% lower than the RX 550's (1,027.7 versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS).

Power and interface differences are pronounced. The RX 550 has a TDP of 50 W, requires no external power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply. The Tesla C2070 has a TDP of 238 W, needs a 6-pin plus an 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 550 W power supply. The RX 550 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the C2070 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The RX 550 also offers modern display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the C2070 has only a single DVI output. API support also diverges: the RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, while the C2070 lists DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan support.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives a clear edge to the AMD Radeon RX 550 in compute workloads, as evidenced by its 13.9% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This makes it the stronger choice for OpenCL-based applications, such as general-purpose GPU computing, video encoding, or physics simulations that rely on that API. Its higher FP32 throughput (1,211.4 versus 1,027.7 GFLOPS) and FP16 support also suggest better performance in tasks that use mixed-precision arithmetic, such as machine learning inference or certain scientific calculations, though such workloads are not directly benchmarked here.

The RX 550's lower power draw (50 W versus 238 W) and lack of external power connectors make it far more suitable for small form factor builds or systems with modest power supplies. Its modern display outputs and support for DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 also make it viable for contemporary gaming or workstation use, where these APIs are increasingly standard. The 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, while lower than the C2070's, is sufficient for its 2 GB capacity and likely adequate for 1080p-class workloads.

The NVIDIA Tesla C2070, despite losing the OpenCL benchmark, retains advantages in specific areas. Its 6 GB memory capacity is triple that of the RX 550, making it better suited for datasets that exceed 2 GB, such as large 3D rendering scenes, complex scientific models, or deep learning training batches that cannot fit in the AMD card's memory. Its wider 384-bit bus and higher total bandwidth (143.4 GB/s) also provide an edge in memory-bandwidth-bound tasks, even if the absolute difference is modest. The C2070's 56 TMUs and 48 ROPs, compared to the RX 550's 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs, could make it faster in texture-heavy or fill-rate-limited scenarios, though no direct benchmarks confirm this.

For users prioritizing compute performance per watt, the RX 550 is clearly superior, as its 13.9% performance lead comes with an 79% reduction in TDP (50 W versus 238 W). For users prioritizing memory capacity above all else, the C2070's 6 GB is a decisive specification, even if its raw compute speed is lower. The C2070's PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while older, offers more lanes than the RX 550's PCIe 3.0 x8, which could matter for data transfer in some workstation setups.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 11,063 versus the NVIDIA Tesla C2070's 9,716. This represents a 13.9% advantage for the RX 550.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare across all tests?

A: The RX 550 has an average benchmark score of 11,075, placing it at the 50th percentile of all GPUs. The Tesla C2070 has an average score of 9,716, placing it at the 47th percentile. This is a difference of 1,359 points.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths of each card?

A: The RX 550 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The Tesla C2070 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 143.4 GB/s.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The RX 550 delivers 1,211.4 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Tesla C2070 delivers 1,027.7 GFLOPS. The RX 550 also supports FP16 at 1,211.4 GFLOPS, whereas the C2070 has no listed FP16 capability.

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

A: The RX 550 has a TDP of 50 W and requires no external power connectors, suggesting a 250 W power supply. The Tesla C2070 has a TDP of 238 W, requires a 6-pin plus an 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 550 W power supply.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Tesla C2070 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed.

Specification Differences

The following table summarizes the key specification differences between the two GPUs, based solely on the recorded data:

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 550 | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Fermi |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 3,100 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 512 | 448 |

| TMUs | 32 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 48 |

| FP32 Performance | 1,211.4 GFLOPS | 1,027.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not listed |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 143.4 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) |

| TDP | 50 W | 238 W |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | Not listed |

| Card Length | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | 248 mm (9.8 inches) |

| Release Date | 2017-04-19 | 2011-07-24 |

| Launch MSRP | 79 USD | Not listed |

The data clearly positions the RX 550 as the more modern, efficient, and faster GPU in the tested compute workload, while the Tesla C2070 offers superior memory capacity and a wider memory bus, though at the cost of significantly higher power consumption and older architecture.