Tesla X2090 vs Radeon RX 550
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 622 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 25 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.92 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.90 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Lexa | GF110 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 20 April 2017 (9 years ago) | 25 July 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $79 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 512 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 1100 MHz | 651 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1183 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,200 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 37.86 | 41.66 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.211 TFLOPS | 1.332 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 48 |
| TMUs | 32 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 768 KB |
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 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | MXM Module |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 924 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 177.4 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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D 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 | - | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 20 April 2017 | 25 July 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
RX 550 has an age advantage of 5 years, a 186% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.
Tesla X2090, on the other hand, has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.
We couldn't decide between Radeon RX 550 and Tesla X2090. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon RX 550 is a desktop graphics card while Tesla X2090 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
