Radeon 660M vs Tesla C2050
Radeon 660M
Popular choices:
Tesla C2050
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Radeon 660M is positioned at rank 399 and the Tesla C2050 is on rank 334, so the Tesla C2050 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon 660M
Performance Per Dollar Tesla C2050
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon 660M is significantly newer (2023 vs 2011). The Radeon 660M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Tesla C2050 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon 660M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tesla C2050.
| Insight | Radeon 660M | Tesla C2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.4%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon 660M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon 660M and Tesla C2050
Radeon 660M
The Radeon 660M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 3 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1500 MHz to 1900 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,221 points.
Tesla C2050
The Tesla C2050 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 25 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 574 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 238W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,176 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon 660M scores 3,221 and the Tesla C2050 reaches 3,176 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon 660M is built on RDNA 2.0 while the Tesla C2050 uses Fermi, both on 6 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 384 (Radeon 660M) vs 448 (Tesla C2050). Raw compute: 1.459 TFLOPS (Radeon 660M) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2050).
| Feature | Radeon 660M | Tesla C2050 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,221+1% | 3,176 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 448+17% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.459 TFLOPS+42% | 1.028 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 24 | 56+133% |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 896 KB+600% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+167% | 0.75 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon 660M | Tesla C2050 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Bus width: System vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon 660M) vs 0.75 MB (Tesla C2050) — the Radeon 660M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon 660M | Tesla C2050 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | System | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+167% | 0.75 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon 660M draws 40W versus the Tesla C2050's 238W — a 142.4% difference. The Radeon 660M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon 660M) vs 350W (Tesla C2050). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon 660M | Tesla C2050 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 40W-83% | 238W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 80.5+505% | 13.3 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon 660M is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2011).
| Feature | Radeon 660M | Tesla C2050 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $2499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $95 |
| Codename | Rembrandt+ | GF100 |
| Release | January 3 2023 | July 25 2011 |
| Ranking | #565 | #569 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon 660M and Tesla C2050
