Radeon Pro 455
VS
Tesla C2075

Radeon Pro 455 vs Tesla C2075

AMD

Radeon Pro 455

2016Core: 855 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

Tesla C2075

2011Core: 574 MHz

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.

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 Radeon Pro 455 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tesla C2075.

InsightRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
Performance
Leading raw performance (+3.2%)
Lower raw frame rates (-3.2%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (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
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon Pro 455 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon Pro 455 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $500), it costs 92% less, resulting in a 1189.8% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
Cost Efficiency
Better overall value (+1189.8%)
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
More affordable ($40)
⚠️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.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon Pro 455 and Tesla C2075

AMD

Radeon Pro 455

The Radeon Pro 455 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 30 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 855 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,113 points.

NVIDIA

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 Pro 455 scores 3,113 and the Tesla C2075 reaches 3,017 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro 455 is built on GCN 4.0 while the Tesla C2075 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 14 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 768 (Radeon Pro 455) vs 448 (Tesla C2075). Raw compute: 1.313 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 455) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2075).

FeatureRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
G3D Mark Score
3,113+3%
3,017
Architecture
GCN 4.0
Fermi 2.0
Process Node
14 nm
40 nm
Shading Units
768+71%
448
Compute (TFLOPS)
1.313 TFLOPS+28%
1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs
16
48+200%
TMUs
48
56+17%
L1 Cache
192 KB
896 KB+367%
L2 Cache
1 MB+33%
0.75 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureRadeon Pro 455Tesla 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: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon Pro 455) vs 0.75 MB (Tesla C2075) — the Radeon Pro 455 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
VRAM Capacity
2 GB
2 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
64-bit
64-bit
L2 Cache
1 MB+33%
0.75 MB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12_0 (Radeon Pro 455) vs 12 (11_0) (Tesla C2075). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 1.

FeatureRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
DirectX
12_0
12 (11_0)
Max Displays
0
1
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon Pro 455 draws 35W versus the Tesla C2075's 247W — a 150.4% difference. The Radeon Pro 455 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro 455) vs 350W (Tesla C2075). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

FeatureRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
TDP
35W-86%
247W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
PCIe-powered
Length
1mm
Slots
0-100%
2
Temp (Load)
85°C
Perf/Watt
88.9+629%
12.2
💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon Pro 455 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Tesla C2075 launched at $0 and now averages $500. The Radeon Pro 455 costs 92% less ($460 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 77.8 (Radeon Pro 455) vs 6.0 (Tesla C2075) — the Radeon Pro 455 offers 1196.7% better value. The Radeon Pro 455 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2011).

FeatureRadeon Pro 455Tesla C2075
MSRP
$0
$0
Avg Price (30d)
$40-92%
$500
Performance per Dollar
77.8+1197%
6.0
Codename
Baffin
GF110
Release
October 30 2016
July 25 2011
Ranking
#577
#553