Radeon HD 8250 vs Tesla M2070

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla M2070 with Radeon HD 8250, including specs and performance data.

Tesla M2070
2011, $3,099
6 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
4.50
+765%

M2070 outperforms HD 8250 by a whopping 765% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7041288
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
Power efficiency1.545.01
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGF100Kalindi
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date25 July 2011 (14 years ago)23 May 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,099 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 cores448128
Core clock speed574 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data400 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million1,178 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt8 Watt
Texture fill rate32.143.200
Floating-point processing power1.03 TFLOPS0.1024 TFLOPS
ROPs484
TMUs568
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache768 KBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount6 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed783 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth150.3 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.0-

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

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 27 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.50 0.52
Recency 25 July 2011 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 8 Watt

Tesla M2070 has a 765% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 8250, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 43% more advanced lithography process, and 2713% lower power consumption.

The Tesla M2070 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla M2070 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 8250 is a notebook one.

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.


5 5 votes

Rate Tesla M2070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 18 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla M2070 or Radeon HD 8250, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.