Quadro 400 vs Tesla M2090
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Tesla M2090 and Quadro 400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
M2090 outperforms 400 by a whopping 2394% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 530 | 1336 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Power efficiency | 2.69 | 0.84 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | GT216 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 25 July 2011 (14 years ago) | 5 April 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $169 |
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 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 651 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 486 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 32 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 41.66 | 7.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.332 TFLOPS | 0.108 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 8 |
| TMUs | 64 | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | 32 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 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 248 mm | 163 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |
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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 924 MHz | 770 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | 12.32 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 | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 2.0 | 1.2 |
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 | 8.73 | 0.35 |
| Recency | 25 July 2011 | 5 April 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 512 MB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 32 Watt |
Tesla M2090 has a 2394.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 months, and a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
Quadro 400, on the other hand, has 681.3% lower power consumption.
The Tesla M2090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 400 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
