UHD Graphics 630 vs Tesla M2090

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla M2090 with UHD Graphics 630, including specs and performance data.

Tesla M2090
2011
6 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
9.51
+208%

Tesla M2090 outperforms UHD Graphics 630 by a whopping 208% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking457761
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Gen. 9.5 (2017)
GPU code nameGF110Kaby-Lake-H-GT2
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date25 July 2011 (13 years ago)1 October 2017 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores51224
Core clock speed651 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1150 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate41.6626.45
Floating-point performance1.332 gflops0.4232 gflops

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount6 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed3696 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth177.4 GB/sno data
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.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.1.103
CUDA2.0-

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 HD55−60
+206%
18
−206%
4K21−24
+200%
7
−200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+0%
7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Hitman 3 6
+0%
6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 13
+0%
13
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+0%
16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27
+0%
27
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
+0%
12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 28
+0%
28
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+0%
11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how Tesla M2090 and UHD Graphics 630 compete in popular games:

  • Tesla M2090 is 206% faster in 1080p
  • Tesla M2090 is 200% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.51 3.09
Recency 25 July 2011 1 October 2017
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 15 Watt

Tesla M2090 has a 207.8% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 630, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.

The Tesla M2090 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 630 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla M2090 is a workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 630 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA Tesla M2090
Tesla M2090
Intel UHD Graphics 630
UHD Graphics 630

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 29 votes

Rate Tesla M2090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3724 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.