RTX A2000 vs Tesla M2090

Place in the ranking	466	142
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	87.82
Power efficiency	2.62	34.95
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GF110	GA106
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	25 July 2011 (13 years ago)	10 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$449

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	512	3328
Core clock speed	651 MHz	562 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1200 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	41.66	124.8
Floating-point processing power	1.332 TFLOPS	7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	48
TMUs	64	104
Tensor Cores	no data	104
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	26

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 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	248 mm	167 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	924 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	177.4 GB/s	288.0 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

No outputs

4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.0	8.6

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	24−27 −292%	94 +292%
1440p	12−14 −275%	45 +275%
4K	7−8 −314%	29 +314%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	4.78
1440p	no data	9.98
4K	no data	15.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	84 +0%	84 +0%
Elden Ring	86 +0%	86 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	62 +0%	62 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	166 +0%	166 +0%
Metro Exodus	106 +0%	106 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Valorant	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	52 +0%	52 +0%
Dota 2	129 +0%	129 +0%
Elden Ring	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Far Cry 5	136 +0%	136 +0%
Fortnite	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130 +0%	130 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	129 +0%	129 +0%
Metro Exodus	71 +0%	71 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Valorant	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	45 +0%	45 +0%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	109 +0%	109 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Valorant	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	58 +0%	58 +0%
Elden Ring	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	58 +0%	58 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	26 +0%	26 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	79 +0%	79 +0%
Metro Exodus	62 +0%	62 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	47 +0%	47 +0%
Valorant	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Dota 2	56 +0%	56 +0%
Elden Ring	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	56 +0%	56 +0%
Metro Exodus	20 +0%	20 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	56 +0%	56 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Fortnite	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	45 +0%	45 +0%
Valorant	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

This is how Tesla M2090 and RTX A2000 compete in popular games:

RTX A2000 is 292% faster in 1080p
RTX A2000 is 275% faster in 1440p
RTX A2000 is 314% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 54 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.53	35.54
Recency	25 July 2011	10 August 2021
Chip lithography	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	70 Watt

RTX A2000 has a 272.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 400% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla M2090 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.