Tesla M2090 vs Radeon RX 470

Place in the ranking	258	463
Place by popularity	55	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.64	no data
Power efficiency	12.19	2.65
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Ellesmere	GF110
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	4 August 2016 (8 years ago)	25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$179	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	2048	512
Core clock speed	926 MHz	651 MHz
Boost clock speed	1206 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,700 million	3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	154.4	41.66
Floating-point processing power	4.94 TFLOPS	1.332 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	48
TMUs	128	64

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	241 mm	248 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1650 MHz	924 MHz
Memory bandwidth	211.2 GB/s	177.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
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.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	71 +137%	30−35 −137%
1440p	41 +128%	18−20 −128%
4K	36 +125%	16−18 −125%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.52	no data
1440p	4.37	no data
4K	4.97	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

30−35
+136%

14−16

−136%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +156%	18−20 −156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +150%	14−16 −150%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +130%	30−33 −130%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +139%	18−20 −139%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +136%	14−16 −136%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +133%	21−24 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +133%	24−27 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +133%	55−60 −133%
Hitman 3	40−45 +128%	18−20 −128%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−105 +122%	45−50 −122%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +140%	30−33 −140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +133%	24−27 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	102 +127%	45−50 −127%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90−95 +135%	40−45 −135%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +156%	18−20 −156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +150%	14−16 −150%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +130%	30−33 −130%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +139%	18−20 −139%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +136%	14−16 −136%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +133%	21−24 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +133%	24−27 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +133%	55−60 −133%
Hitman 3	40−45 +128%	18−20 −128%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−105 +122%	45−50 −122%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +140%	30−33 −140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +133%	24−27 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	88 +151%	35−40 −151%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +124%	21−24 −124%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90−95 +135%	40−45 −135%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +156%	18−20 −156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +150%	14−16 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +139%	18−20 −139%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +136%	14−16 −136%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +133%	21−24 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +133%	55−60 −133%
Hitman 3	40−45 +128%	18−20 −128%
Horizon Zero Dawn	74 +147%	30−33 −147%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	67 +123%	30−33 −123%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40 +122%	18−20 −122%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90−95 +135%	40−45 −135%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+133%

24−27

−133%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +122%	18−20 −122%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +129%	14−16 −129%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +138%	8−9 −138%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +130%	10−11 −130%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +136%	50−55 −136%
Hitman 3	24−27 +150%	10−11 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	53 +121%	24−27 −121%
Metro Exodus	46 +156%	18−20 −156%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	51 +143%	21−24 −143%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +140%	10−11 −140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 +124%	55−60 −124%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40
+150%

14−16

−150%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Hitman 3	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +140%	45−50 −140%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +130%	10−11 −130%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +144%	9−10 −144%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +142%	12−14 −142%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	25 +150%	10−11 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+125%

8−9
−125%

This is how RX 470 and Tesla M2090 compete in popular games:

RX 470 is 137% faster in 1080p
RX 470 is 128% faster in 1440p
RX 470 is 125% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.99	9.51
Recency	4 August 2016	25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	250 Watt

RX 470 has a 120.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 108.3% lower power consumption.

Tesla M2090, on the other hand, has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Radeon RX 470 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla M2090 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 470 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.