NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070 Comparison

NVIDIA Tesla C2070 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by more than a decade of architectural evolution. The Tesla C2070 is a Fermi-generation compute card from 2011, built for professional workstations and high-performance computing, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile is an Ampere-generation laptop part from 2023, designed for mainstream gaming and portable devices. The database records one head-to-head benchmark between them: Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998 versus the C2070’s 9,716, a delta of -81.7% (meaning the C2070 is 81.7% behind). This single result, combined with their architectural and specification differences, tells a clear story of generational progress.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8,746, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 has an average score of 9,716. Despite the C2070’s higher average, the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins the only shared head-to-head test by a massive margin.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998, while the Tesla C2070 scores 9,716. The delta percentage is -81.7%, indicating the C2070 trails the mobile Ampere part by that amount in this specific compute workload.

Q: What are the memory configurations of each GPU?

A: The Tesla C2070 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding 143.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The newer GPU has less capacity but higher bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and what does that imply?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, compared to the C2070’s 448. This fourfold increase in shader count, combined with the Ampere architecture, drives the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s substantially higher FP32 throughput of 4.813 TFLOPS versus 1,027.7 GFLOPS.

Q: What is the process node difference and its impact?

A: The Tesla C2070 uses a 40 nm process at TSMC, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. The newer node allows for 43.5M transistors per mm² against 5.9M per mm², enabling the RTX 3050 A Mobile to pack 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die, versus 3,100 million in a 529 mm² die for the C2070.

Q: Does the RTX 3050 A Mobile support ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Yes, the RTX 3050 A Mobile includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, features that are entirely absent from the Tesla C2070. These hardware units enable real-time ray tracing and AI-accelerated features that the Fermi card cannot perform.

Architecture Differences

The Tesla C2070 is built on the Fermi architecture with the GF100 chip, a design originally intended for high-end compute workloads. It uses a 40 nm process from TSMC, packing 3,100 million transistors onto a large 529 mm² die. The transistor density is a modest 5.9M per mm². Fermi introduced unified memory addressing and strong double-precision compute, which made it popular for scientific simulations. The C2070 has 448 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. Its memory subsystem consists of 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, producing 143.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The card operates with a memory clock of 747 MHz, translating to 3 Gbps effective. It supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, but lacks Vulkan support. The power envelope is high at 238 W, requiring a dual-slot cooler and both a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector, with a suggested power supply of 550 W.

In contrast, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is based on the Ampere architecture with the GA106 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. This newer node allows for 12,000 million transistors in a smaller 276 mm² die, achieving a much higher transistor density of 43.5M per mm². Ampere introduces a fundamentally different compute architecture, with 1,792 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Critically, it adds 14 dedicated ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS-style AI features. The memory configuration is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s bandwidth at a memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its TDP is dramatically lower at 45 W, making it suitable for integration into laptops as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no dedicated power connectors.

The architectural gap is also visible in the feature set. The Tesla C2070 is a pure compute card with a single DVI output, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s display outputs are portable-device dependent, reflecting its mobile nature. The bus interface differs too: PCIe 2.0 x16 on the C2070 versus PCIe 4.0 x8 on the RTX 3050 A Mobile. The Fermi card is end-of-life with a 2011 release date, while the Ampere mobile part is also end-of-life but released in late 2023. The C2070’s predecessor is Tesla and its successor is Tesla Kepler, whereas the RTX 3050 A Mobile follows the GeForce 20 Mobile generation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this workload, the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998, while the Tesla C2070 scores 9,716. The delta percentage of -81.7% indicates that the C2070 is 81.7% behind the mobile Ampere part. This is a decisive victory for the RTX 3050 A Mobile, reflecting its much higher shader count, newer architecture, and faster memory bandwidth. The C2070’s 448 shading units and 143.4 GB/s bandwidth simply cannot compete with the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 1,792 shading units and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth in a compute-heavy OpenCL task.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s FP32 throughput of 4.813 TFLOPS is roughly 4.7 times higher than the C2070’s 1,027.7 GFLOPS. This sheer compute advantage, combined with the Ampere architecture’s efficiency, explains the vast score gap. The C2070 does have a higher average benchmark score across all recorded tests (9,716 versus 8,746), but this is because the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s average includes several PassMark tests where it scores relatively low (e.g., 61 in DirectX 10, 55 in DirectX 12, 152 in DirectX 9). In the one test where both GPUs are measured identically, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is overwhelmingly faster.

It is worth remembering the C2070’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla M10 (score 9,724, delta -0.1%), the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (score 9,665, delta 0.5%), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (score 9,653, delta 0.7%). The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (score 8,743, delta 0%), the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (score 8,686, delta 0.7%), and the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (score 8,851, delta -1.2%). These rival comparisons show that the C2070 sits in a similar performance class to mid-range workstation GPUs of its era, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s average score is dragged down by its weaker PassMark results, despite its OpenCL dominance.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two GPUs are stark and largely explain their performance gap. The process node is a fundamental divergence: 40 nm (TSMC) for the C2070 versus 8 nm (Samsung) for the RTX 3050 A Mobile. Transistor count jumps from 3,100 million to 12,000 million, while die size shrinks from 529 mm² to 276 mm². Transistor density increases from 5.9M per mm² to 43.5M per mm², a 7.4x improvement.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The C2070 has no recorded base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1343 MHz, with a memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Memory size drops from 6 GB to 4 GB, but type changes from GDDR5 to GDDR6, and bus width narrows from 384-bit to 128-bit. Despite the narrower bus, bandwidth increases from 143.4 GB/s to 192.0 GB/s due to faster memory.

Compute resources show the generational leap. Shading units increase from 448 to 1,792, TMUs remain identical at 56, and ROPs decrease from 48 to 32. The RTX 3050 A Mobile adds 14 RT cores and 56 tensor cores, which the C2070 lacks entirely. Pixel rate rises from 16.07 GPixel/s to 42.98 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 32.14 GTexel/s to 75.21 GTexel/s. FP32 performance jumps from 1,027.7 GFLOPS to 4.813 TFLOPS, and the RTX 3050 A Mobile also supports FP16 at 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1), while the C2070 has no FP16 capability recorded.

Power and physical characteristics diverge dramatically. The C2070 has a TDP of 238 W, is dual-slot, requires 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W. The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a TDP of 45 W, is IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width, and requires no power connectors. The C2070 measures 248 mm (9.8 inches) in length, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile has no recorded dimensions. Bus interface changes from PCIe 2.0 x16 to PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs go from 1x DVI to portable-device dependent. API support expands: DirectX from 12 (11_0) to 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL remains 4.6, and Vulkan goes from none to 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins decisively in the only direct benchmark comparison, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a margin of 81.7%. It also wins on every compute-related specification: FP32 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, shading units, and memory bandwidth. Its support for ray tracing and tensor cores opens up workloads that are simply impossible on the C2070, such as real-time ray tracing and AI-accelerated rendering. Its low TDP of 45 W makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, whereas the C2070’s 238 W TDP demands a desktop workstation with substantial cooling and power delivery. For any modern gaming, AI inference, or content creation task that leverages Ampere’s features, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear choice.

The Tesla C2070 has its own niches, though they are narrower. It offers 6 GB of memory, which is 50% more than the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 4 GB. For certain large datasets or legacy compute tasks that require more VRAM, the C2070 can hold an advantage. Its 384-bit memory bus, while slower in bandwidth, provides higher memory capacity per bit, which some older scientific applications may prefer. The C2070’s higher average benchmark score of 9,716 versus 8,746 suggests it performs more consistently across a range of tests, even if it loses the one shared test badly. Its PCIe 2.0 x16 interface may be more compatible with older workstation motherboards, and its DVI output is useful for legacy display setups. For users maintaining legacy compute infrastructure or running software that specifically requires Fermi-era features, the C2070 remains functional, but it is end-of-life and dominated by the RTX 3050 A Mobile in raw performance.

The database’s percentile rankings reflect this split: the C2070 sits at the 47th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at the 44th percentile. These are close, indicating that despite the massive OpenCL gap, the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s other test scores (PassMark DirectX 9 at 152, DirectX 11 at 94) are low enough to bring its average down. The C2070’s nearest rivals (Tesla M10, Quadro P4000) are all within 1% of its score, showing it is a well-rounded compute card for its era. The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s nearest rivals (GTX 460 v2, Quadro P2200) are also closely clustered, but its OpenCL result stands far above them. For users prioritizing modern compute performance and energy efficiency, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the superior part. For those needing more VRAM or legacy compatibility, the Tesla C2070 retains a narrow but real relevance.