Tesla K80 vs Radeon E8950
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon E8950 with Tesla K80, including specs and performance data.
Tesla K80 outperforms E8950 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 367 | 349 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.40 | 3.52 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) |
| GPU code name | Amethyst | GK210 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 29 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 17 November 2014 (10 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2048 | 2496 |
| Core clock speed | 735 MHz | 562 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 824 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 7,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 | 171.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.096 TFLOPS | 4.113 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 48 |
| TMUs | 128 | 208 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1253 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 240.6 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.7 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 14.17 | 15.17 |
| Recency | 29 September 2015 | 17 November 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 300 Watt |
Radeon E8950 has an age advantage of 10 months, and 215.8% lower power consumption.
Tesla K80, on the other hand, has a 7.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon E8950 and Tesla K80.
Be aware that Radeon E8950 is a notebook card while Tesla K80 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
