Radeon HD 6990 vs Tesla C2075

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Radeon HD 6990

375

3,014

0.0%

Radeon Vega 8 Ryzen 3 3200G

3,017

+0.1%

GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Tesla C2075 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 6990.

Insight	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	Standard Size (310mm)	—

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon HD 6990 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 6990 holds the technical lead. Priced at $498 (vs $500), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 0.3% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+0.3%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($498)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500)

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.

Radeon HD 6990 Benchmark Check

Tesla C2075 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon HD 6990 and Tesla C2075

Radeon HD 6990

The Radeon HD 6990 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 8 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 830 MHz. It has 1536 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 375W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,014 points. Launch price was $699.

Tesla C2075

The Tesla C2075 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 25 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 574 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 247W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,017 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon HD 6990 scores 3,014 and the Tesla C2075 reaches 3,017 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 6990 is built on TeraScale 3 while the Tesla C2075 uses Fermi 2.0, both on a 40 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 448 (Tesla C2075). Raw compute: 2.55 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2075).

Feature	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
G3D Mark Score	3,014	3,017
Architecture	TeraScale 3	Fermi 2.0
Process Node	40 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	1536 ×2+243%	448
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.55 TFLOPS ×2+148%	1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs	32 ×2	48+50%
TMUs	96 ×2+71%	56
L1 Cache	384 KB	896 KB+133%
L2 Cache	512 KB	768 KB+50%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
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 GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Radeon HD 6990) vs 768 KB (Tesla C2075) — the Tesla C2075 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	512 KB	768 KB+50%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.2 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 12 (11_0) (Tesla C2075). OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 5 vs 1.

Feature	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
DirectX	11.2	12 (11_0)+7%
OpenGL	4.4	4.6+5%
Max Displays	5+400%	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Radeon HD 6990) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Tesla C2075).

Feature	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
Encoder	None	—
Decoder	UVD 3.0	—
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon HD 6990 draws 375W versus the Tesla C2075's 247W — a 41.2% difference. The Tesla C2075 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 750W (Radeon HD 6990) vs 350W (Tesla C2075). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 85°C.

Feature	Radeon HD 6990	Tesla C2075
TDP	375W	247W-34%
Recommended PSU	750W	350W-53%
Power Connector	2x 8-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	310mm	—
Height	115mm	—
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	85	85°C
Perf/Watt	8.0	12.2+52%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon HD 6990 launched at $699 MSRP and currently averages $498, while the Tesla C2075 launched at $0 and now averages $500. The Radeon HD 6990 costs 0.4% less ($2 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.1 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 6.0 (Tesla C2075) — the Radeon HD 6990 offers 1.7% better value.