NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 vs NVIDIA Tesla C2075 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 scores 51,204 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 scores 10,400 points. The GTX 1080 is 392.3% ahead in this test.

Q: What are the process nodes and architectures of these two GPUs?

A: The GTX 1080 uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm TSMC process with the GP104 chip. The Tesla C2075 uses the Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm TSMC process with the GF110 chip.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GTX 1080 has 8 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, while the Tesla C2075 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GTX 1080 has an average benchmark score of 11,960 across all recorded tests. The Tesla C2075 has an average benchmark score of 10,400, based on its single recorded OpenCL result.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The GTX 1080 contains 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die, resulting in a density of 22.9M per mm². The Tesla C2075 contains 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, resulting in a density of 5.8M per mm².

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for each card?

A: The GTX 1080 achieves a pixel rate of 110.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 277.3 GTexel/s. The Tesla C2075 achieves a pixel rate of 16.07 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 32.14 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 is built on the Pascal architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 16 nm process. In contrast, the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture, also produced by TSMC but on a 40 nm process. This process generation gap is substantial: the GTX 1080 packs 7,200 million transistors into a 314 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.9 million per mm², whereas the Tesla C2075 fits only 3,000 million transistors onto a much larger 520 mm² die, giving a density of 5.8 million per mm². The data indicates the GTX 1080 achieves more than three times the transistor density, a direct result of the finer manufacturing node.

The compute core counts differ dramatically. The GTX 1080 has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Tesla C2075 has 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. This means the GTX 1080 has more than five times as many shading units, nearly three times as many TMUs, and a third more ROPs. Neither card includes dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as both predate the RTX generation.

Memory architecture also differs. The GTX 1080 uses 8 GB of GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective), delivering 320.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla C2075 uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, with memory at 783 MHz (3.1 Gbps effective), providing 150.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite having a narrower bus, the GTX 1080 achieves more than double the memory bandwidth because of its much faster memory clock and newer memory type.

Compute capabilities further separate the two. The GTX 1080 delivers 8.873 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Tesla C2075 delivers 1,027.7 GFLOPS (approximately 1.03 TFLOPS). The GTX 1080 also has a listed FP16 rate of 138.6 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), while the Tesla C2075 has no recorded FP16 capability. The GTX 1080 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Tesla C2075 tops out at DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support listed.

Interface and power delivery also differ. The GTX 1080 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Tesla C2075 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The GTX 1080 has a TDP of 180 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector, while the Tesla C2075 has a higher TDP of 247 W and needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector. The suggested power supply is 450 W for the GTX 1080 and 550 W for the Tesla C2075.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 1080 wins the only directly comparable benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, by a commanding margin. This test is a general compute workload that reflects raw parallel processing capability, so the GTX 1080's advantage in shading units, clock speed, memory bandwidth, and modern architecture all contribute to its dominance. There are no recorded benchmark results where the Tesla C2075 beats the GTX 1080.

The GTX 1080 is the clear choice for any workload that stresses FP32 compute, pixel throughput, or texture throughput. Its pixel rate of 110.9 GPixel/s versus 16.07 GPixel/s and texture rate of 277.3 GTexel/s versus 32.14 GTexel/s indicate that it is roughly seven to eight times faster in these rasterization-oriented metrics. The GTX 1080 also has a wider set of benchmark entries in the database: 11 recorded tests spanning DirectX 9 through DirectX 12, Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan, 2D, and GPU compute, compared to the Tesla C2075's single OpenCL result.

The Tesla C2075 does not win any recorded test, but its specification profile reveals where it was designed to operate. It has a larger die (520 mm²) and a wider 384-bit memory bus, characteristics typical of a compute-oriented accelerator from the Fermi era. Its 6 GB of GDDR5 memory, while slower and smaller than the GTX 1080's 8 GB GDDR5X, still provides a reasonably large frame buffer for its time. However, in the data available, the Tesla C2075 simply cannot keep pace with the GTX 1080 on any measure of raw performance.

For users considering these two cards from a purely benchmark-driven perspective, the GTX 1080 is the only rational choice for compute performance. The Tesla C2075's lone OpenCL score of 10,400 places it in the 48th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the GTX 1080 sits at the 51st percentile. The gap in percentile is modest, but the gap in absolute OpenCL performance is enormous, which suggests that the percentile figures reflect very different comparison pools given the difference in the number of benchmark entries.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification category. The GTX 1080 uses the GP104 chip with the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process, while the Tesla C2075 uses the GF110 chip with the Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm process. Transistor counts are 7,200 million versus 3,000 million, die sizes are 314 mm² versus 520 mm², and transistor densities are 22.9M per mm² versus 5.8M per mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly: the GTX 1080 has a base clock of 1607 MHz and a boost clock of 1733 MHz, while the Tesla C2075 has no listed base or boost clocks. Memory clocks are 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1080 versus 783 MHz (3.1 Gbps effective) for the Tesla C2075.

Memory specifications: 8 GB GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 320.3 GB/s bandwidth versus 6 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 150.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources: the GTX 1080 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs; the Tesla C2075 has 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Neither has RT or tensor cores.

Performance rates: the GTX 1080 achieves 110.9 GPixel/s and 277.3 GTexel/s; the Tesla C2075 achieves 16.07 GPixel/s and 32.14 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 8.873 TFLOPS versus 1,027.7 GFLOPS. The GTX 1080 has an FP16 rate of 138.6 GFLOPS (1:64); the Tesla C2075 has no FP16 figure.

Power and physical specifications: TDP is 180 W versus 247 W, power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin, and suggested PSU is 450 W versus 550 W. Both are dual-slot cards. The GTX 1080 measures 267 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width; the Tesla C2075 measures 248 mm in length with no recorded height or width.

Bus interface and outputs: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 2.0 x16. The GTX 1080 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the Tesla C2075 offers only 1x DVI. API support: DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 versus DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, no Vulkan.

Release dates and lifecycle: the GTX 1080 was released on 2016-05-26, the Tesla C2075 on 2011-07-24. Both are end-of-life. The GTX 1080's predecessor is GeForce 900 and its successor is GeForce 20; the Tesla C2075's predecessor is Tesla and its successor is Tesla Kepler.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are decisive. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 scores 51,204 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 scores 10,400 points. The delta is 392.3% in favor of the GTX 1080. This means the GTX 1080 delivers nearly five times the OpenCL compute performance of the Tesla C2075.

This single test encapsulates the broader performance gap visible in their respective specification sheets. The GTX 1080's FP32 throughput of 8.873 TFLOPS is roughly 8.6 times higher than the Tesla C2075's 1,027.7 GFLOPS, and the OpenCL score delta of 392.3% is consistent with that kind of compute advantage, though not perfectly proportional. The GTX 1080 also has 2,560 shading units versus 448, and 320.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 150.3 GB/s, both of which feed directly into OpenCL workloads.

Looking at the GTX 1080's broader benchmark suite, its scores range from a low of 55 in Passmark DirectX 12 to a high of 51,204 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its Passmark G3D score is 15,586, and its GPU compute score is 7,614. Its average benchmark score across all 11 tests is 11,960, which places it at the 51st percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals by average score are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A at 11,998 (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT at 11,842 (1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 at 11,680 (2.4% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT at 11,627 (2.9% behind). These deltas show that the GTX 1080 sits in a tightly contested performance band despite its much larger OpenCL advantage over the Tesla C2075.

The Tesla C2075's single OpenCL score of 10,400 gives it an average benchmark score of 10,400 and places it at the 48th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6500M at 10,362 (0.4% ahead of the Tesla), the AMD Radeon RX 550X at 10,481 (0.8% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A at 10,273 (1.2% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R9 M275X at 10,582 (1.7% behind). These are very close margins, indicating that the Tesla C2075 is competitive with a much older, lower-end class of mobile and entry-level desktop GPUs in OpenCL compute, a far cry from the GTX 1080's standing among modern desktop parts.

In summary, the recorded data shows a one-sided comparison. The GTX 1080 wins the only head-to-head test by 392.3%, and its specification advantages in shading units, memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput all point in the same direction. The Tesla C2075, despite its larger die and wider memory bus, is outclassed in every measurable way.