NVIDIA Tesla M6 vs AMD Radeon R9 280X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Tesla M6 and AMD Radeon R9 280X 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 - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla M6
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1180 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 250 Watt
- 2.7x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 3 GB
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6226 vs 6148
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 August 2015 vs 8 October 2013 |
| Boost clock speed | 1180 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 250 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 3 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6226 vs 6148 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280X
- Around 13% higher texture fill rate: 128.0 GTexel / s vs 113.3 GTexel / s
- Around 33% higher pipelines: 2048 vs 1536
- Around 13% better floating-point performance: 4,096 gflops vs 3,625 gflops
- 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 676 vs 319
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9603 vs 9390
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9603 vs 9390
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3260
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3260
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 GTexel / s vs 113.3 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 1536 |
| Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops vs 3,625 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 676 vs 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9603 vs 9390 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9603 vs 9390 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3700 vs 3683 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3700 vs 3683 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3260 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla M6
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280X
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Tesla M6 | AMD Radeon R9 280X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 319 | 676 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6226 | 6148 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9390 | 9603 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9390 | 9603 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 | 3700 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 | 3700 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3260 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3260 | 3357 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 89.187 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1434.496 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.656 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 87.459 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 493.57 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2351 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Tesla M6 | AMD Radeon R9 280X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GM204 | Tahiti |
| Launch date | 30 August 2015 | 8 October 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 384 | 381 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1180 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 930 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,625 gflops | 4,096 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1536 | 2048 |
| Texture fill rate | 113.3 GTexel / s | 128.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 4,313 million |
| Stream Processors | 2048 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Length | 275 mm | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.4 GB / s | 288 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Tesla M6 with others
NVIDIATesla M6 vs
ATIRadeon X800 GT
NVIDIATesla M6 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTS 150M
NVIDIATesla M6 vs
AMDRadeon R9 280X
NVIDIATesla M6 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M365X
NVIDIATesla M6 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650
NVIDIATesla M6 vs
AMDRadeon RX 5300M
