Tesla X2090 vs Radeon R7 240
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 849 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.16 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Oland | GF110 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (10 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $69 | 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 | 320 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 651 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 950 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 14.00 | 41.66 |
| Floating-point performance | 0.448 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 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | MXM Module |
| Supplementary power connectors | N/A | no data |
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 | 1150 MHz | 3696 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 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 VGA | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| 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 | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 8 October 2013 | 25 July 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
R7 240 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.
Tesla X2090, on the other hand, has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.
We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 240 and Tesla X2090. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon R7 240 is a desktop card while Tesla X2090 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.
