NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070 Comparison

NVIDIA’s Tesla C2070 and GeForce GTX 760 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a clear, if narrow, performance hierarchy. The GeForce GTX 760 is the outright winner in the single shared compute test, posting a Geekbench OpenCL score of 11,299 against the Tesla C2070’s 9,716 — a 14% lead. However, the Tesla C2070, despite being the older Fermi-based compute card, holds its own in the broader competitive landscape, sitting at the 47th percentile among all GPUs compared to the GTX 760’s 46th percentile. This near-identical percentile ranking, despite the GTX 760’s higher raw score, suggests the Tesla C2070’s larger memory pool and professional positioning compensate for its architectural age in certain workloads. The data shows a split: the GTX 760 dominates raw compute throughput, while the Tesla C2070 offers a specialized feature set that keeps it relevant in its niche.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 760 wins decisively on raw computational output. In the only directly comparable benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 11,299 versus the Tesla C2070’s 9,716 — a 14% advantage. This lead is rooted in the GTX 760’s higher shader count (1,152 versus 448) and its significantly higher clock speeds, with a base clock of 980 MHz and boost of 1,032 MHz, whereas the Tesla C2070 has no listed base or boost clocks. The GTX 760 also holds the edge in pixel and texture processing, delivering 24.77 GPixel/s and 99.07 GTexel/s compared to the Tesla C2070’s 16.07 GPixel/s and 32.14 GTexel/s. For any workload that relies on raw fill rates or parallel floating-point math, the GTX 760 is the clear choice.

The Tesla C2070 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth efficiency relative to its generation. It packs 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, versus the GTX 760’s 2 GB on a 256-bit bus. While the GTX 760 actually has higher raw bandwidth (192.3 GB/s versus 143.4 GB/s), the Tesla C2070’s triple the memory capacity makes it the superior option for datasets that exceed 2 GB — a common scenario in scientific computing and large-scale data processing. The Tesla C2070 also positions itself as a compute-oriented product, with its Fermi architecture and 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, suggesting a design focused on double-precision and professional workloads rather than gaming. The GTX 760, by contrast, is a consumer GeForce product with a smaller 294 mm² die and 3,540 million transistors, optimized for gaming and general-purpose compute but with less memory headroom.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The Tesla C2070 uses the GF100 chip based on Fermi architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 40 nm process. It packs 3,100 million transistors into a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The GTX 760 uses the GK104 chip based on Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a more advanced 28 nm process. It contains 3,540 million transistors in a much smaller 294 mm² die, achieving a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter — more than double the Tesla C2070’s density.

The shading unit counts tell a stark story. The Tesla C2070 has 448 shading units, 56 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 render output units (ROPs). The GTX 760 more than doubles the shading units to 1,152, increases TMUs to 96, but drops ROPs to 32. This configuration suggests the GTX 760 is better suited for compute-heavy tasks with many parallel threads, while the Tesla C2070’s higher ROP count (48 versus 32) gives it an edge in certain memory-intensive operations. The memory clock also differs: the Tesla C2070 runs at 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective), while the GTX 760 runs at 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective).

Feature support diverges as well. The GTX 760 supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Tesla C2070 has no Vulkan support listed. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 760 also has a more modern bus interface — PCIe 3.0 x16 versus the Tesla C2070’s PCIe 2.0 x16 — and offers more display outputs: 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, versus the Tesla C2070’s single DVI port. The GTX 760’s power requirements are lower as well, with a 170 W TDP and a suggested 450 W PSU, compared to the Tesla C2070’s 238 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The GeForce GTX 760 scores 11,299 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 14% higher than the Tesla C2070’s 9,716.

Q: Does the Tesla C2070 have any advantage in memory capacity?

A: Yes, the Tesla C2070 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory, which is triple the GTX 760’s 2 GB. This makes it preferable for workloads that require more than 2 GB of VRAM.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture?

A: No. The Tesla C2070 uses the Fermi architecture (GF100 chip) on a 40 nm process, while the GTX 760 uses the Kepler architecture (GK104 chip) on a 28 nm process.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: Only the GeForce GTX 760 supports Vulkan, with version 1.2.175. The Tesla C2070 has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Tesla C2070 has a 238 W TDP and requires a 550 W PSU, while the GTX 760 has a 170 W TDP and requires a 450 W PSU.

Q: What are the display output capabilities?

A: The GTX 760 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The Tesla C2070 offers only a single DVI output.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | Kepler |

| Chip | GF100 | GK104 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1,032 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) | 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 143.4 GB/s | 192.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 448 | 1,152 |

| TMUs | 56 | 96 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 16.07 GPixel/s | 24.77 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 32.14 GTexel/s | 99.07 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,027.7 GFLOPS | 2.378 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 238 W | 170 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 450 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Vulkan Support | Not listed | 1.2.175 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 249 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is decisive. The GeForce GTX 760 scores 11,299, while the Tesla C2070 scores 9,716. The delta is 14% in favor of the GTX 760. This is a significant margin in compute performance, driven by the GTX 760’s 1,152 shading units running at 980 MHz base and 1,032 MHz boost, versus the Tesla C2070’s 448 shading units with no listed clock speed. The GTX 760’s FP32 throughput of 2.378 TFLOPS is more than double the Tesla C2070’s 1,027.7 GFLOPS, which aligns with the benchmark delta.

However, the broader benchmark context shows the Tesla C2070 is not far behind in overall standing. The Tesla C2070’s average benchmark score is 9,716, placing it at the 47th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla M10 (9,724, 0.1% slower), the Quadro P4000 (9,665, 0.5% faster), and the Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9,653, 0.7% faster). The GTX 760’s average score is 9,458, which is lower than the Tesla C2070’s despite its higher OpenCL score, because the GTX 760’s average includes additional benchmarks — Metal at 4,524 and Vulkan at 12,551 — that pull the average down. The GTX 760 sits at the 46th percentile, with rivals like the GTX TITAN BLACK (9,474, 0.2% slower), Radeon R7 M380 (9,313, 1.6% faster), and GTX 850M (9,302, 1.7% faster) in close proximity.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear recommendation for most users: the GeForce GTX 760 wins on raw compute performance, with a 14% lead in OpenCL and more than double the FP32 throughput. It is also more efficient, with a 170 W TDP versus 238 W, a smaller die, and a more advanced 28 nm process. For gaming, general compute, or any workload where raw speed matters, the GTX 760 is the superior choice. Its additional display outputs and Vulkan support make it far more versatile for consumer use.

The Tesla C2070, however, is not without merit. Its 6 GB memory capacity is a decisive advantage for datasets that exceed the GTX 760’s 2 GB limit. In scientific computing, large simulations, or machine learning workloads where memory footprint is the bottleneck, the Tesla C2070’s triple memory capacity can be the difference between running a model and running out of VRAM. Its higher ROP count (48 versus 32) also suggests better performance in certain memory-bandwidth-bound operations. The Tesla C2070’s percentile ranking (47th) is actually one point higher than the GTX 760’s (46th), indicating that its overall competitive position is slightly better when all GPUs are considered.

Choose the GeForce GTX 760 for speed, efficiency, and consumer feature support. Choose the Tesla C2070 for memory capacity and professional compute workloads where 2 GB is insufficient. The benchmark data shows the GTX 760 is the better all-around card, but the Tesla C2070 remains a specialized tool with a clear purpose.