Radeon R9 360 vs Tesla C2075

Radeon R9 360

2015Core: 900 MHzBoost: 925 MHz

Tesla C2075

2011Core: 574 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Radeon R9 360

3,032

+0.5%

3,017

0.0%

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. The Radeon R9 360 is positioned at rank #179 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. 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 Radeon R9 360

#169

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

354%

#171

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

321%

#172

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

320%

#176

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

291%

#177

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

289%

#179

Radeon R9 360

MSRP: $99|Avg: $55

100%

#180

GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (móvel)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $65

100%

#181

GeForce GTX 460M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

99%

#182

Radeon 6750M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $25

99%

#183

GeForce GT 525M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

98%

#185

Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

98%

#187

GeForce MX550

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

98%

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 R9 360 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tesla C2075.

Insight	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))	🛑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 R9 360 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 360 holds the technical lead. Priced at $55 (vs $500), it costs 89% less, resulting in a 813.6% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+813.6%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($55)	⚠️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 R9 360 Benchmark Check

Tesla C2075 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 360 and Tesla C2075

Radeon R9 360

The Radeon R9 360 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 925 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,032 points.

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 360 scores 3,032 and the Tesla C2075 reaches 3,017 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 360 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Tesla C2075 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 512 (Radeon R9 360) vs 448 (Tesla C2075). Raw compute: 0.9472 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 360) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Tesla C2075).

Feature	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
G3D Mark Score	3,032	3,017
Architecture	GCN 1.0	Fermi 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	512+14%	448
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.9472 TFLOPS	1.028 TFLOPS+9%
ROPs	16	48+200%
TMUs	32	56+75%
L1 Cache	128 KB	896 KB+600%
L2 Cache	256 KB	768 KB+200%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R9 360	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: 256 KB (Radeon R9 360) vs 768 KB (Tesla C2075) — the Tesla C2075 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	768 KB+200%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_0) (Radeon R9 360) vs 12 (11_0) (Tesla C2075). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 1.

Feature	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (11_0)
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4+300%	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R9 360) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Tesla C2075).

Feature	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
Encoder	VCE 2.0	—
Decoder	UVD 4.2	—
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 360 draws 30W versus the Tesla C2075's 247W — a 156.7% difference. The Radeon R9 360 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 360) vs 350W (Tesla C2075). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 85°C.

Feature	Radeon R9 360	Tesla C2075
TDP	30W-88%	247W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	165mm	—
Height	110mm	—
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	75-12%	85°C
Perf/Watt	101.1+729%	12.2

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon R9 360 launched at $99 MSRP and currently averages $55, while the Tesla C2075 launched at $0 and now averages $500. The Radeon R9 360 costs 89% less ($445 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 55.1 (Radeon R9 360) vs 6.0 (Tesla C2075) — the Radeon R9 360 offers 818.3% better value. The Radeon R9 360 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2011).