Radeon RX 6300 vs Tesla C2075

Place in the ranking	490	368
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.46	30.71
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GF110	Navi 24
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	25 July 2011 (13 years ago)	no data (2024 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	448	768
Core clock speed	574 MHz	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2040 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	247 Watt	32 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.14	97.92
Floating-point processing power	1.028 TFLOPS	3.133 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	32
TMUs	56	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	248 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	32 Bit
Memory clock speed	783 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	150.3 GB/s	64 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	1x DVI	2x HDMI 2.1
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.0	-

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

RX 6300 14.10
+61.7%

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

RX 6300 5440
+61.7%

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	8.72	14.10
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	247 Watt	32 Watt

Tesla C2075 has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RX 6300, on the other hand, has a 61.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 566.7% more advanced lithography process, and 671.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla C2075 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla C2075 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6300 is a desktop one.

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