AMD Radeon R9 M275X vs NVIDIA Tesla M2050
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 M275X and NVIDIA Tesla M2050 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M275X
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 57% higher core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 575 MHz
- Around 15% higher texture fill rate: 37 GTexel / s vs 32.2 GTexel / s
- Around 43% higher pipelines: 640 vs 448
- Around 15% better floating-point performance: 1,184 gflops vs 1,030.4 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
- Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.109 vs 23.848
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 28 January 2014 vs 25 July 2011 |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 575 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 37 GTexel / s vs 32.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 640 vs 448 |
Floating-point performance | 1,184 gflops vs 1,030.4 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 3 GB |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.109 vs 23.848 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla M2050
- 2.7x more memory clock speed: 3092 MHz vs 1125 MHz
- 3.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 36584 vs 11041
- 3.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 966.795 vs 283.116
- Around 44% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.15 vs 2.187
- Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 44.227 vs 33.837
- Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 95.318 vs 91.407
Specifications (specs) | |
Memory clock speed | 3092 MHz vs 1125 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 36584 vs 11041 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 966.795 vs 283.116 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.15 vs 2.187 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.227 vs 33.837 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 95.318 vs 91.407 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M275X
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla M2050
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R9 M275X | NVIDIA Tesla M2050 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1537 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 307 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11041 | 36584 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.109 | 23.848 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 283.116 | 966.795 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.187 | 3.15 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 33.837 | 44.227 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 91.407 | 95.318 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3265 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1228 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1705 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3265 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1228 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1705 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R9 M275X | NVIDIA Tesla M2050 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |
Code name | Venus | GF100 |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Launch date | 28 January 2014 | 25 July 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 1125 | 1128 |
Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $2,699 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 925 MHz | |
Compute units | 10 | |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 575 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,184 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 448 |
Texture fill rate | 37 GTexel / s | 32.2 GTexel / s |
Transistor count | 1,500 million | 3,100 million |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Eyefinity | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 248 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 11 | 12.0 (11_0) |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | Not Listed | |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 148.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1125 MHz | 3092 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
DualGraphics | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
PowerTune | ||
Switchable graphics | ||
ZeroCore |