Tesla S2050 vs Radeon R9 280

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking364not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.39no data
Power efficiency5.02no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTahitiGF100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $11,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1792448
Core clock speedno data574 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt900 Watt
Texture fill rate104.532.14
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs11256

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB3 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz773 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s148.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA-2.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 4 March 2014 25 July 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 900 Watt

R9 280 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 280 and Tesla S2050. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while Tesla S2050 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280
NVIDIA Tesla S2050
Tesla S2050

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 385 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 57 votes

Rate Tesla S2050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.