Tesla M2090 vs Radeon RX 460 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 460 Mobile with Tesla M2090, including specs and performance data.

RX 460 Mobile
2016
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
9.36
+5.9%

RX 460 Mobile outperforms Tesla M2090 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking460483
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.452.59
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameBaffinGF110
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date8 August 2016 (8 years ago)25 July 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86 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 cores896512
Core clock speed1000 MHz651 MHz
Boost clock speed1180 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate66.0841.66
Floating-point processing power2.115 TFLOPS1.332 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs5664

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data248 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz924 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s177.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/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 HD35
+16.7%
30−35
−16.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.46no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Fortnite 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
Valorant 90−95
+7.1%
85−90
−7.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+10%
130−140
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Dota 2 65−70
+13.3%
60−65
−13.3%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Fortnite 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Valorant 90−95
+7.1%
85−90
−7.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Dota 2 65−70
+13.3%
60−65
−13.3%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+13.3%
30−33
−13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Valorant 90−95
+7.1%
85−90
−7.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+14%
50−55
−14%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+10.8%
65−70
−10.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+8.9%
45−50
−8.9%
Valorant 100−110
+6%
100−105
−6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Valorant 45−50
+8.9%
45−50
−8.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

This is how RX 460 Mobile and Tesla M2090 compete in popular games:

  • RX 460 Mobile is 17% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.36 8.84
Recency 8 August 2016 25 July 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 250 Watt

RX 460 Mobile has a 5.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 354.5% lower power consumption.

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

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 460 Mobile and Tesla M2090.

Be aware that Radeon RX 460 Mobile is a notebook card while Tesla M2090 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 RX 460 Mobile
Radeon RX 460
NVIDIA Tesla M2090
Tesla M2090

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.


2.8 17 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 30 votes

Rate Tesla M2090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 460 Mobile or Tesla M2090, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.