Radeon R9 260 vs Tesla C2075

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 C2075 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 C2075: 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

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 21.9 vs 0 G3D/$ ($139 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅More future proof: GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Tesla C2075

2011

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌2011 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 21.9 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $139 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R9 260 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 1% in PassMark G3D (3,048 vs 3,017), 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 today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup.

Radeon R9 260 vs Tesla C2075 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 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 R9 260 scores 3,048 and the Tesla C2075 reaches 3,017 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 260 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Tesla C2075 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Radeon R9 260) vs 448 (Tesla C2075). Raw compute: 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 260) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2075).

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2075
G3D Mark Score	3,048+1%	3,017
Architecture	GCN 2.0	Fermi 2.0
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 C2075
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)

Both cards ship with 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the Radeon R9 260 and 64-bit on the Tesla C2075. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon R9 260) vs 0.75 MB (Tesla C2075) — the Radeon R9 260 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2075
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
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 C2075's 247W — a 10.7% difference. The Tesla C2075 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (Radeon R9 260) vs 350W (Tesla C2075). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2075
TDP	275W	247W-10%
Recommended PSU	450W	350W-22%
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	PCIe-powered
Slots	—	2
Temp (Load)	—	85°C
Perf/Watt	11.1	12.2+10%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Radeon R9 260 came in at $139, while the Tesla C2075 launched at $0. On MSRP, Tesla C2075 was 100+% cheaper ($139 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 21.9 (Radeon R9 260) vs Infinity (Tesla C2075) — the Tesla C2075 offers Infinity% better value. The newer card here is Radeon R9 260 (2013 vs 2011).

Feature	Radeon R9 260	Tesla C2075
MSRP	$139	$0-100%
Performance per Dollar	21.9	Infinity
Codename	Hawaii	GF110
Release	November 5 2013	July 25 2011
Ranking	#316	#553

Search Radeon R9 260 on Amazon

Search Tesla C2075 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.