Radeon RX Vega 3 vs Tesla X2090

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated778
Place by popularitynot in top-10080
Power efficiencyno data13.85
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGF110Picasso
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date25 July 2011 (13 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores512192
Core clock speed651 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1001 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate41.6612.01
Floating-point processing power1.332 TFLOPS0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs484
TMUs6412

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
WidthMXM Moduleno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 speed924 MHzSystem Shared
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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 25 July 2011 6 January 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Tesla X2090 and Radeon RX Vega 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Tesla X2090 is a workstation card while Radeon RX Vega 3 is a notebook 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 X2090
Tesla X2090
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3

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.


2.3 3 votes

Rate Tesla X2090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1962 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 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.