Tesla M2070 vs Radeon Pro WX 4130

Place in performance ranking	587	598
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation	0.32	0.06
Architecture	Polaris (2016−2019)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Polaris	GF100
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	1 March 2017 (7 years ago)	25 July 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$3,099
Current price	$2000	$4064 (1.3x MSRP)

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro WX 4130 has 433% better value for money than Tesla M2070.

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	640	448
Core clock speed	no data	574 MHz
Boost clock speed	1053 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,000 million	3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	225 Watt
Texture fill rate	42.12	32.14
Floating-point performance	no data	1,030.4 gflops

Form Factor & Compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro WX 4130 and Tesla M2070 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	248 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	7000 MHz	3132 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	150.3 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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

Supported Technologies

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

FreeSync

no data

API Compatibility

List of supported graphics 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	no data	2.0

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

8−9
+14.3%

7−8

−14.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Battlefield 5	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%
Hitman 3	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +8.3%	12−14 −8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Battlefield 5	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%
Hitman 3	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +8.3%	12−14 −8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Battlefield 5	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Hitman 3	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Hitman 3	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

Pros & Cons Summary

Performance score	5.08	4.87
Recency	1 March 2017	25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	225 Watt