AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla M2090 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single shared benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT posts a score of 18,290, while the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 trails with 13,075. That translates to a 28.5% deficit for the older NVIDIA part. In practical terms, the RX 7800 XT completes the same compute workload with significantly more headroom, and the margin is substantial enough to place the two cards in different performance tiers entirely.

Looking at the Tesla M2090's position within the database, its Geekbench OpenCL score of 13,075 places it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals bracket it tightly: the GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER sits just 0.7% behind with 12,986, the GeForce GTX 950 edges it by 0.9% with 13,189, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile trails by 1% with 12,940, and the Radeon RX 580 sits 1.1% behind with 12,928. The M2090 holds a narrow advantage over most of these cards, but the margins are razor thin, never exceeding 1.1%. This suggests the Tesla M2090 lands in a crowded midfield cluster where a few percentage points separate a half dozen competitors.

The Radeon RX 7800 XT, by contrast, records an average benchmark score of 11,627 across all of its tested workloads, which lands it in the 51st percentile. Its nearest rivals in the overall average include the GeForce GTX 1660 at 11,680 (0.5% ahead of the RX 7800 XT), the Radeon Pro 5500M at 11,528 (0.9% behind), the Tesla K20c at 11,479 (1.3% behind), and the Radeon RX 6500 XT at 11,842 (1.8% ahead). The RX 7800 XT's average score is dragged down by several low individual results, particularly its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 304, DirectX 10 score of 121, and DirectX 12 score of 93. These legacy API results are not representative of its modern workload performance, but they do lower the aggregate figure.

The discrepancy between the RX 7800 XT's 18,290 in Geekbench OpenCL and its much lower average benchmark score of 11,627 highlights how differently various test suites treat the same hardware. The database records only the Geekbench OpenCL result for the Tesla M2090, so its average score of 13,075 reflects that single data point, not a broader suite of tests.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different eras of GPU design. The Tesla M2090 uses the GF110 chip built on Fermi 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon RX 7800 XT uses the Navi 32 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 5 nm node. The process node difference alone, 40 nm versus 5 nm, represents multiple generations of manufacturing refinement, and the transistor counts reflect that gap. The M2090 packs 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.8 million per square millimeter. The RX 7800 XT crams 28,100 million transistors onto a smaller 346 mm² die, achieving 81.2 million transistors per square millimeter, roughly 14 times the density of the older chip.

Memory configurations diverge sharply as well. The Tesla M2090 offers 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 177.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7800 XT carries 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but its memory clock runs at 19.5 Gbps effective, producing 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, roughly 3.5 times the M2090's throughput. The wider bus on the older card cannot compensate for the vastly faster memory on the newer one.

Computational resources tell a similar story. The M2090 has 512 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The RX 7800 XT fields 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, along with 60 dedicated ray tracing cores. The RX 7800 XT also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio to FP32, both listed at 37.32 TFLOPS, while the M2090 has no FP16 figure recorded. The M2090's FP32 output is 1,332.2 GFLOPS, which is a tiny fraction of the RX 7800 XT's 37.32 TFLOPS.

The RX 7800 XT also carries modern API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The M2090 lists DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan support at all. The interface also differs, with the M2090 using PCIe 2.0 x16 and the RX 7800 XT using PCIe 4.0 x16. The M2090 has no display outputs, a hallmark of a compute-focused accelerator, while the RX 7800 XT provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800 XT wins in every recorded scenario where both have data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 18,290 beats the M2090's 13,075 by 28.5%. For compute workloads measured through OpenCL, the RX 7800 XT is the clear choice. Its 16 GB of memory, 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, and 37.32 TFLOPS FP32 throughput provide a massive foundation for GPU compute tasks, and the 60 ray tracing cores add hardware acceleration for workloads that can leverage them.

The M2090's strengths are more contextual. Within the database's recorded metrics, it holds a 53rd percentile ranking versus the RX 7800 XT's 51st percentile, though this comparison is complicated by the different benchmark suites applied to each card. The M2090's nearest rival comparisons show it performing within 1.1% of cards like the GTX 1660 SUPER and RX 580, which are far more modern consumer parts. For a 2011-era accelerator, that level of sustained compute performance in a single benchmark is notable, though it does not translate to a win against the RX 7800 XT anywhere in the recorded data.

The M2090 also draws less power at 250 W versus 263 W for the RX 7800 XT, but both cards suggest a 600 W power supply, so that small difference is unlikely to change a purchasing decision. The M2090's 6 GB frame buffer and lack of display outputs restrict it to headless compute roles, whereas the RX 7800 XT can drive displays and handle graphics workloads across DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan, and OpenGL.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the superior GPU in every measured comparison. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 28.5% higher than the Tesla M2090's, and it offers 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, 60 ray tracing cores, modern API support, and display outputs. The M2090, by contrast, is an end-of-life compute accelerator with 6 GB of GDDR5, no display outputs, no Vulkan support, and a single recorded benchmark that places it in the middle of the pack against much newer consumer cards.

For anyone choosing between these two for a new build, the RX 7800 XT is the only sensible option if the workload involves modern graphics, ray tracing, or general-purpose compute on current APIs. The M2090 might still hold interest for legacy compute environments or as a historical data point, but the recorded performance gap leaves no ambiguity about which card delivers more capability. The RX 7800 XT's active production status and 2023 release date, versus the M2090's 2011 release and end-of-life status, further reinforce that the newer card is the relevant choice for contemporary use.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT than the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 7800 XT scores 18,290 while the M2090 scores 13,075, a 28.5% advantage for the AMD card.

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 has 6 GB of GDDR5.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 support ray tracing?

A: No. The M2090 has no ray tracing cores recorded in the database, while the RX 7800 XT includes 60 ray tracing cores.

Q: Can the Tesla M2090 connect to a display?

A: No, the M2090 lists no display outputs. The RX 7800 XT provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 7800 XT achieves 81.2 million transistors per square millimeter on a 346 mm² die, compared to the M2090's 5.8 million per square millimeter on a 520 mm² die.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT?

A: The launch MSRP is 499 USD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M2090 | AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 28,100 million |

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 346 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.8M / mm² | 81.2M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | 624.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 64 | 240 |

| ROPs | 48 | 96 |

| RT Cores | None | 60 |

| FP32 Performance | 1,332.2 GFLOPS | 37.32 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None recorded | 37.32 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 263 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 2x 8-pin |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | None | 1.4 |

| Length | 248 mm (9.8 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | None recorded | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | None recorded | 50 mm (2 inches) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2011-07-24 | 2023-09-05 |