FirePro W4300 vs Tesla C2075

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla C2075 and FirePro W4300, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Tesla C2075
2011
6 GB GDDR5, 247 Watt
8.72
+16.3%

Tesla C2075 outperforms W4300 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking486524
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.4410.39
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGF110Bonaire
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date25 July 2011 (13 years ago)1 December 2015 (8 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 cores448768
Core clock speed574 MHz930 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)247 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate32.1444.64
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS1.428 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs5648

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length248 mm171 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed783 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/s96 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 Connectors1x DVI4x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.0-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Tesla C2075 8.72
+16.3%
FirePro W4300 7.50

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Tesla C2075 3364
+16.2%
FirePro W4300 2894

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 8.72 7.50
Recency 25 July 2011 1 December 2015
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 247 Watt 50 Watt

Tesla C2075 has a 16.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro W4300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 394% lower power consumption.

The Tesla C2075 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W4300 in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA Tesla C2075
Tesla C2075
AMD FirePro W4300
FirePro W4300

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.


3.1 29 votes

Rate Tesla C2075 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 21 vote

Rate FirePro W4300 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.