GRID M60-2Q vs Radeon R9 FURY X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 FURY X with GRID M60-2Q, including specs and performance data.

R9 FURY X
2015, $649
4 GB High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), 275 Watt
22.43
+80.3%

R9 FURY X outperforms M60-2Q by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking283435
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.82no data
Power efficiency6.264.25
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameFijiGM204
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 June 2015 (10 years ago)30 August 2015 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores40962048
Compute units64no data
Core clock speedno data557 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1178 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate268.8150.8
Floating-point processing power8.602 TFLOPS4.825 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs256128
L1 Cache1 MB768 KB
L2 Cache2 MB2 MB

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length195 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s160.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
Mantle+-
CUDA-5.2

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R9 FURY X 22.43
+80.3%
GRID M60-2Q 12.44

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 FURY X 9379
+80.3%
Samples: 174
GRID M60-2Q 5203
Samples: 6

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 22.43 12.44
Recency 24 June 2015 30 August 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 225 Watt

R9 FURY X has a 80.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GRID M60-2Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months, and 22.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 FURY X is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M60-2Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 FURY X is a desktop graphics card while GRID M60-2Q is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R9 FURY X
Radeon R9 FURY X
NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q
GRID M60-2Q

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 91 votes

Rate Radeon R9 FURY X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate GRID M60-2Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 FURY X or GRID M60-2Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.