Radeon R9 290X2 vs Tesla M2070
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 704 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.05 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.54 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | Hawaii |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 25 July 2011 (14 years ago) | 24 June 2014 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,099 | $1,399 |
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 | 448 | 2816 ×2 |
| Core clock speed | 574 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 6,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 580 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 32.14 | 176.0 ×2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.03 TFLOPS | 5.632 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 48 | 64 ×2 |
| TMUs | 56 | 176 ×2 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | 704 KB |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 1024 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 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 248 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 3-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 4x 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 4 GB ×2 |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 512 Bit ×2 |
| Memory clock speed | 783 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 150.3 GB/s | 345.6 GB/s ×2 |
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 | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 2.0 | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 25 July 2011 | 24 June 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 580 Watt |
Tesla M2070 has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 158% lower power consumption.
R9 290X2, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Tesla M2070 and Radeon R9 290X2. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Tesla M2070 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 290X2 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
