NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070 Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA Tesla C2070 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 are both Fermi-generation parts built on the same GF100 chip, but the data shows they serve very different purposes. The Tesla C2070 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, scoring 9716 to the GTX 465's 9294, a 4.5% advantage. That is a modest performance gap, but the real story is in the specifications: the Tesla has 6 GB of GDDR5 versus 1 GB on the GTX 465, a 384-bit bus versus 256-bit, and 143.4 GB/s of bandwidth versus 102.7 GB/s. The Tesla also has notably more execution resources — 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs against 352, 44, and 32 respectively.

Given that delta, the Tesla C2070 is the pick for compute-heavy workloads where memory capacity and bandwidth matter more than raw FPS. The GTX 465, by contrast, is the more practical choice for a classic desktop build — it has dual DVI outputs plus mini-HDMI, draws 200 W instead of 238 W, and its 46th percentile ranking is barely below the Tesla's 47th. If you are building a system that needs display outputs and lower power draw, the GTX 465 is the sensible option. If you need to hold large datasets in VRAM, the Tesla's 6 GB is the deciding factor.

FAQ

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

A: The NVIDIA Tesla C2070 scores 9716 versus 9294 for the GTX 465, a 4.5% lead for the Tesla.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Tesla C2070 comes with 6 GB of GDDR5, while the GTX 465 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5.

Q: Do both cards use the same chip and architecture?

A: Yes, both use the GF100 chip on the Fermi architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 40 nm process with 3,100 million transistors and a 529 mm² die.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Tesla C2070 delivers 143.4 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the GTX 465 manages 102.7 GB/s over a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture units?

A: The Tesla C2070 has 448 shading units and 56 TMUs. The GTX 465 has 352 shading units and 44 TMUs.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the GTX 465?

A: The GTX 465 had a launch MSRP of 279 USD. The Tesla C2070 has no listed launch MSRP in the data.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same GF100 chip, which is the foundational Fermi design. They share the 40 nm process node at TSMC, the same 3,100 million transistor count, and an identical 529 mm² die size. The transistor density is 5.9M / mm² for both. They also share the same API support: DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support listed.

The key architectural differences are in how the chip is configured. The Tesla C2070 enables more of the GF100's execution units: 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The GTX 465 is a cut-down version with 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That means the Tesla has roughly 27% more shading units and TMUs, and 50% more ROPs — a substantial difference in raw throughput capability.

Memory architecture is where the cards diverge most sharply. The Tesla C2070 uses a 384-bit memory bus with 6 GB of GDDR5, while the GTX 465 uses a 256-bit bus with 1 GB. The Tesla's memory clock is 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective), and the GTX 465 runs at 802 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective). Despite the GTX 465's higher memory clock, the Tesla's wider bus gives it significantly more bandwidth: 143.4 GB/s versus 102.7 GB/s.

There is a generation gap in release timing. The GTX 465 was released on 2010-05-30 as part of the GeForce 400 family, succeeding GeForce 200 and preceding GeForce 500. The Tesla C2070 came later on 2011-07-24, part of the Tesla Fermi (x20xx) generation, with Tesla as its predecessor and Tesla Kepler as its successor. Both are now end-of-life products.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows clear divergences in compute resources, memory, and power. The Tesla C2070 has 448 shading units versus 352 on the GTX 465 — a difference of 96 units. TMUs are 56 versus 44, and ROPs are 48 versus 32. Pixel rate on the Tesla is 16.07 GPixel/s versus 13.38 GPixel/s on the GTX 465. Texture rate is 32.14 GTexel/s versus 26.75 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,027.7 GFLOPS versus 855.4 GFLOPS — the Tesla is ahead by about 20%.

Memory is the largest gap. The Tesla has 6 GB versus 1 GB, a 384-bit bus versus 256-bit, and 143.4 GB/s versus 102.7 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 465 runs its memory at a higher clock — 802 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) versus 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) — but the narrower bus negates that advantage.

Power and cooling differ too. The Tesla C2070 has a 238 W TDP and requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. The GTX 465 has a 200 W TDP and uses 2x 6-pin connectors. Both cards are dual-slot and recommend a 550 W PSU. The Tesla is slightly longer at 248 mm (9.8 inches) versus 241 mm (9.5 inches) for the GTX 465.

Display outputs are a major practical difference. The Tesla C2070 has only 1x DVI. The GTX 465 has 2x DVI plus 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a — clearly aimed at desktop use. Both use PCIe 2.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL. The Tesla C2070 scores 9716, and the GTX 465 scores 9294. That is a 4.5% delta in favor of the Tesla. The Tesla wins the head-to-head 1-0.

Looking at the percentile rankings, the Tesla sits at the 47th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 465 is at the 46th. That is essentially a tie in overall standing — a 1-percentile difference is within noise for this kind of benchmark. The Tesla's nearest rivals include the Tesla M10 (9724, -0.1%), the Quadro P4000 (9665, +0.5%), the Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9653, +0.7%), and the GeForce GTX 1070 (9780, -0.7%). The GTX 465's nearest rivals are the GTX 850M (9302, -0.1%), the Radeon R7 M380 (9313, -0.2%), the GTX 960 (9273, +0.2%), and the Radeon Vega 8 (9221, +0.8%).

Those rival deltas show that both cards sit in a crowded performance band. The Tesla's 4.5% lead over the GTX 465 is larger than the gap between the GTX 465 and most of its nearest rivals. In practical terms, the Tesla is meaningfully faster, but not by a huge margin — it is not in a different performance class.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla C2070 wins in every compute metric that matters for data-heavy workloads. Its 1,027.7 GFLOPS of FP32 performance is about 20% higher than the GTX 465's 855.4 GFLOPS. The 6 GB memory capacity is six times the GTX 465's 1 GB, which is decisive for holding large datasets, models, or rendering buffers. The 143.4 GB/s bandwidth is roughly 40% higher, reducing the penalty when data exceeds the GTX 465's smaller cache and memory pool. The higher pixel rate (16.07 GPixel/s vs 13.38 GPixel/s) and texture rate (32.14 GTexel/s vs 26.75 GTexel/s) also favor the Tesla.

The GTX 465 wins on practical desktop usability. It has three display outputs (2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI) versus the Tesla's single DVI, making it far more suitable for a multi-monitor setup. It draws 38 W less power (200 W vs 238 W), which matters for system thermals and PSU headroom even though both recommend the same 550 W PSU. The GTX 465 also uses two 6-pin connectors instead of a 6-pin plus 8-pin combo, which is easier to accommodate on older power supplies. The GTX 465's higher memory clock (3.2 Gbps effective vs 3 Gbps) gives it a slight edge in raw memory speed, though the bandwidth deficit from the narrower bus cancels that out.

The GTX 465 also has a lower launch MSRP of 279 USD, though the Tesla C2070 has no listed MSRP in the data. For a builder choosing between these two end-of-life cards today, the decision comes down to workload: the Tesla C2070 for compute, memory capacity, and bandwidth; the GTX 465 for display flexibility, lower power draw, and easier power connector requirements. The 4.5% benchmark delta is real but modest — neither card is dramatically faster than the other in general compute.