Tesla M2090 vs Radeon R7 360
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R7 360 with Tesla M2090, including specs and performance data.
Tesla M2090 outperforms R7 360 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 513 | 457 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.10 | no data |
Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
GPU code name | Tobago | GF110 |
Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
Design | reference | no data |
Release date | 18 June 2015 (9 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (13 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $109 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 512 |
Core clock speed | no data | 651 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 3,000 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 250 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 50.40 | 41.66 |
Floating-point performance | 1.613 gflops | 1.332 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 165 mm | 248 mm |
Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Bridgeless CrossFire | + | - |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz | 3696 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 177.4 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Eyefinity | + | - |
Number of Eyefinity displays | 6 | no data |
HDMI | + | - |
DisplayPort support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
CrossFire | + | - |
FreeSync | + | - |
PowerTune | + | - |
TrueAudio | + | - |
VCE | + | - |
DDMA audio | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
Vulkan | + | N/A |
Mantle | + | - |
CUDA | - | 2.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 8.04 | 9.50 |
Recency | 18 June 2015 | 25 July 2011 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 250 Watt |
R7 360 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.
Tesla M2090, on the other hand, has a 18.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The Tesla M2090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 360 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R7 360 is a desktop card while Tesla M2090 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.