AMD Radeon RX 6600S vs NVIDIA Tesla C2070 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between these two cards is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is a decisive sweep for the AMD Radeon RX 6600S. The AMD card scores 66,435 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 manages just 9,716 points. That is a delta of 583.8% in favor of the Radeon, making it over six times faster in this compute-oriented test. For context, the RX 6600S's average benchmark score across all its tests is 10,629, placing it in the 49th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla C2070's average score equals its lone Geekbench result of 9,716, putting it in the 47th percentile. The wins column confirms the story: AMD takes 1 win, NVIDIA takes 0.

This is not a close contest by any metric. The gap is so large that it suggests a generational chasm rather than a mere performance tier difference. In the nearest-rival comparison, the RX 6600S sits within a narrow band of cards like the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (0.4% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (0.6% behind), but the Tesla C2070 is grouped with different hardware entirely, including the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (0.5% behind) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (0.7% behind). When two cards have nearest rivals that do not overlap, it signals they occupy different performance ecosystems.

The Geekbench OpenCL score is particularly relevant for compute workloads, which is what the Tesla C2070 was designed for. Yet even in that domain, it loses by a factor of nearly seven. The RX 6600S's FP32 throughput is listed at 7.168 TFLOPS, whereas the Tesla C2070 is rated at 1,027.7 GFLOPS — that is roughly a 7x advantage for AMD, which aligns with the benchmark delta. The pixel rate also favors AMD at 128.0 GPixel/s versus 16.07 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 224.0 GTexel/s versus 32.14 GTexel/s. Every measurable compute and rasterization metric points the same direction.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide here is vast. The AMD Radeon RX 6600S uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Tesla C2070 uses the GF100 chip with Fermi architecture, also from TSMC but on a much older 40 nm node. The transistor counts tell the story: AMD packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding a density of 46.7 million transistors per square millimeter. NVIDIA's chip has only 3,100 million transistors across a larger 529 mm² die, resulting in just 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD chip is smaller, denser, and far more efficient in design.

Memory configurations differ sharply as well. The RX 6600S has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla C2070 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, but only achieves 143.4 GB/s due to its slower memory clock of 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) versus the AMD's 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The Tesla has more capacity but far less bandwidth, which hurts in bandwidth-hungry workloads.

The compute resources are also mismatched. The RX 6600S features 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Tesla C2070 has 448 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores at all. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Tesla supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support listed. The RX 6600S also has FP16 throughput of 14.34 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), whereas the Tesla has no listed FP16 capability.

Power and physical design could not be more different. The RX 6600S is an IGP with a TDP of 80 W and no power connectors, designed for portable devices with display outputs that are device-dependent. The Tesla C2070 is a dual-slot card with a 238 W TDP, requiring both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 550 W. It measures 248 mm (9.8 inches) in length and outputs via a single DVI port. The RX 6600S uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Tesla uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600S wins decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 66,435 versus the Tesla C2070's 9,716, a 583.8% advantage. Its FP32 throughput is 7.168 TFLOPS compared to 1,027.7 GFLOPS for the Tesla.

Q: Does the Tesla C2070 have more memory?

A: Yes, the Tesla C2070 has 6 GB of GDDR5, while the RX 6600S has 4 GB of GDDR6. However, the AMD card has much higher bandwidth at 224.0 GB/s versus 143.4 GB/s, so the Tesla's capacity advantage does not translate into a speed advantage.

Q: Are these cards from the same era?

A: No. The Tesla C2070 was released in 2011, while the RX 6600S arrived in 2022. The Tesla uses 40 nm Fermi architecture, while the RX 6600S uses 7 nm RDNA 2.0. That 11-year gap explains the massive performance difference.

Q: Can the Tesla C2070 support modern graphics APIs?

A: It supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but it lacks Vulkan support. The RX 6600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it far more future-proof for current software.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The RX 6600S draws 80 W, while the Tesla C2070 draws 238 W. The AMD card delivers vastly higher performance at less than a third of the power draw, making it the clear efficiency winner.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The RX 6600S is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, designed for laptops or portable devices. The Tesla C2070 is a dual-slot add-in card requiring 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 550 W.

The Verdict

The data makes this an easy call. The AMD Radeon RX 6600S outperforms the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 in every measurable way. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 66,435 versus 9,716 is a 583.8% difference, and the architectural advantages — smaller process node, higher transistor density, more shading units, greater memory bandwidth — all reinforce that result. The RX 6600S also carries a much lower TDP of 80 W versus 238 W, making it suitable for platforms where the Tesla simply cannot fit.

The Tesla C2070 does have one advantage: 6 GB of memory versus 4 GB. For workloads that require more capacity than speed, that could matter. But given that the AMD card has 56.2% more bandwidth (224.0 GB/s vs 143.4 GB/s), the practical benefit of the Tesla's extra capacity is limited. The Tesla's nearest rivals all sit within 0.7% of its average score, indicating it is essentially a mid-tier card from a bygone era. The RX 6600S's average benchmark score of 10,629 is also higher than the Tesla's 9,716, reinforcing its overall superiority.

For any modern workload — gaming, general compute, or content creation — the RX 6600S is the only rational choice from this pair. The Tesla C2070 is end-of-life, uses a 40 nm process, and lacks modern API support. The only scenario where the Tesla makes sense is if you specifically need 6 GB of VRAM in a compute server with old PCIe 2.0 slots and can tolerate its power draw and dual-slot footprint. Otherwise, the AMD card wins outright.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6600S | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Fermi |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 3,100 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 143.4 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 448 |

| TMUs | 112 | 56 |

| ROPs | 64 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 128.0 GPixel/s | 16.07 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 224.0 GTexel/s | 32.14 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.168 TFLOPS | 1,027.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 14.34 TFLOPS (2:1) | None |

| TDP | 80 W | 238 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | None | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | None |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2011-07-24 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6600S wins in essentially every performance category. It dominates compute with a 583.8% Geekbench OpenCL lead, and its FP32 throughput of 7.168 TFLOPS is roughly 7x the Tesla's 1,027.7 GFLOPS. It wins on memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s vs 143.4 GB/s), pixel rate (128.0 GPixel/s vs 16.07 GPixel/s), and texture rate (224.0 GTexel/s vs 32.14 GTexel/s). It has 4x the shading units, 2x the TMUs, and more ROPs. It also supports ray tracing, Vulkan, and DirectX 12 Ultimate, making it suitable for modern gaming and graphics workloads. Its 7 nm process and 80 W TDP make it viable for thin-and-light portable devices, with no external power connectors required.

The NVIDIA Tesla C2070 wins in exactly one area: memory capacity. It offers 6 GB versus 4 GB, which could be relevant for datasets that exceed 4 GB but do not require high bandwidth. It also uses a wider 384-bit memory bus, though the effective bandwidth is lower due to the slower memory clock. Its PCIe 2.0 x16 interface is wider than the AMD's x8, but the older standard means lower total bandwidth. The Tesla's dual-slot form factor and 248 mm length make it a standard expansion card, which is an advantage if you need to install it in a desktop workstation with available PCIe slots. However, its 238 W TDP and requirement for both 6-pin and 8-pin power connectors make it far less flexible in deployment.

For a portable gaming or workstation laptop, the RX 6600S is the clear pick. For a legacy compute server with PCIe 2.0 slots and a need for 6 GB of VRAM, the Tesla C2070 has a narrow use case. But the benchmark data is unambiguous: the RX 6600S is the faster, more efficient, and more capable card in virtually all scenarios.