Radeon R9 270 vs Tesla K20c
Radeon R9 270
Popular choices:
Tesla K20c
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Tesla K20c
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla K20c is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 270.
| Insight | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 270 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 270 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $500), it costs 94% less, resulting in a 1519.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1519.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($30) | ⚠️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 R9 270 and Tesla K20c
Radeon R9 270
The Radeon R9 270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 925 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,306 points. Launch price was $179.
Tesla K20c
The Tesla K20c is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 12 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 2496 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,432 points. Launch price was $3,199.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 270 scores 4,306 and the Tesla K20c reaches 4,432 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 270 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Tesla K20c uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon R9 270) vs 2,496 (Tesla K20c). Raw compute: 2.368 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 270) vs 3.524 TFLOPS (Tesla K20c).
| Feature | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,306 | 4,432+3% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280 | 2496+95% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.368 TFLOPS | 3.524 TFLOPS+49% |
| ROPs | 32 | 40+25% |
| TMUs | 80 | 208+160% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+54% | 208 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1.25 MB+150% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 256-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 270) vs 1.25 MB (Tesla K20c) — the Tesla K20c has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+300% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1.25 MB+150% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 270 draws 150W versus the Tesla K20c's 225W — a 40% difference. The Radeon R9 270 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R9 270) vs 350W (Tesla K20c). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-33% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 267mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 28.7+46% | 19.7 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 270 launched at $179 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Tesla K20c launched at $3199 and now averages $500. The Radeon R9 270 costs 94% less ($470 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 143.5 (Radeon R9 270) vs 8.9 (Tesla K20c) — the Radeon R9 270 offers 1512.4% better value. The Radeon R9 270 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | Radeon R9 270 | Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $179-94% | $3199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30-94% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 143.5+1512% | 8.9 |
| Codename | Curacao | GK110 |
| Release | November 13 2013 | November 12 2012 |
| Ranking | #476 | #549 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 270 and Tesla K20c
