Radeon R9 260 vs Tesla C2070

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.

Radeon R9 260 vs Tesla C2070 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Radeon R9 260 vs Tesla C2070: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Radeon R9 260

2013

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,360 less on MSRP ($139 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 953.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 21.9 vs 2.1 G3D/$ ($139 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
✅More future proof: GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌15.5% higher power demand at 275W vs 238W.

Tesla C2070

2011

Why buy it

✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Draws 238W instead of 275W, a 37W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2011 hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
978.4% HIGHER MSRP
$1,499 MSRPvs$139 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.1 vs 21.9 G3D/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $139 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Tesla C2070 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 2.4% in PassMark G3D (3,121 vs 3,048), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon R9 260 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, a 28nm process instead of 40nm, and a newer 2013 generation instead of 2011. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R9 260 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $1,360 cheaper on MSRP at $139 vs $1,499, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 953.2% (21.9 vs 2.1), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Tesla C2070 still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Radeon R9 260 vs Tesla C2070 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Radeon R9 260

The Radeon R9 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,048 points. Launch price was $399.

Tesla C2070

The Tesla C2070 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: 3,121 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon R9 260 scores 3,048 and the Tesla C2070 reaches 3,121 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 260 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Tesla C2070 uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Radeon R9 260) vs 448 (Tesla C2070). Raw compute: 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 260) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2070).

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2070
G3D Mark Score	3,048	3,121+2%
Architecture	GCN 2.0	Fermi
Process Node	28 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	2560+471%	448
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.849 TFLOPS+372%	1.028 TFLOPS
ROPs	64+33%	48
TMUs	160+186%	56
L1 Cache	640 KB	896 KB+40%
L2 Cache	1 MB+33%	0.75 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2070
Upscaling Tech	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Radeon R9 260 has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla C2070 carries 6 GB. Tesla C2070 gives you 200% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the Radeon R9 260 and 64-bit on the Tesla C2070. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon R9 260) vs 0.75 MB (Tesla C2070) — the Radeon R9 260 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2070
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	6 GB+200%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+33%	0.75 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 260 draws 275W versus the Tesla C2070's 238W — a 14.4% difference. The Tesla C2070 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (Radeon R9 260) vs 350W (Tesla C2070). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2070
TDP	275W	238W-13%
Recommended PSU	450W	350W-22%
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	—	248mm
Slots	—	2
Perf/Watt	11.1	13.1+18%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Radeon R9 260 came in at $139, while the Tesla C2070 launched at $1499. On MSRP, Radeon R9 260 was 90.7% cheaper ($1360 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 21.9 (Radeon R9 260) vs 2.1 (Tesla C2070) — the Radeon R9 260 offers 942.9% better value. The newer card here is Radeon R9 260 (2013 vs 2011).

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2070
MSRP	$139-91%	$1499
Performance per Dollar	21.9+943%	2.1
Codename	Hawaii	GF100
Release	November 5 2013	July 25 2011
Ranking	#316	#575

Search Radeon R9 260 on Amazon

Search Tesla C2070 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.