AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 vs NVIDIA Tesla M2090 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 and NVIDIA Tesla M2090 represent two very different eras and design philosophies in GPU hardware. The Vega 11 is a modern integrated graphics processor built into AMD’s Picasso APU family, while the Tesla M2090 is a dedicated compute accelerator from NVIDIA’s Fermi generation. The recorded data in the database provides one direct head-to-head benchmark, along with aggregate scores and rival comparisons that reveal how each part fits into the broader GPU landscape. This analysis focuses strictly on those recorded measurements, their deviations, and the architectural realities that separate the two.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark shared by both GPUs in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 scores 13,075, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 scores 12,525. The Tesla M2090 wins by a delta of -4.2% from the perspective of the AMD part, meaning the Tesla is 4.2% faster in this single OpenCL workload. This is a narrow margin, and it suggests that despite the Tesla M2090 being a much older, power-hungry compute card, its raw compute throughput still edges out the modern integrated Vega 11 in this specific API test.

Breaking down the Vega 11’s own benchmark profile, it also records a Geekbench Metal score of 17,086 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 13,543. The Metal score is notably higher than its OpenCL result, indicating that the Vega 11 benefits from Apple’s Metal API in ways that OpenCL does not capture. The Vulkan score sits between the two, at 13,543. The Tesla M2090 has no Metal or Vulkan scores recorded, so the comparison is limited to OpenCL only. However, the Vega 11’s average benchmark score across all tests is 14,385, which is higher than the Tesla’s single recorded average of 13,075. That 1,310-point gap, or roughly 10% higher average, comes from the Vega 11’s additional Metal and Vulkan results.

The nearest rivals for each GPU provide context. The Vega 11’s average score of 14,385 places it just 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (14,373) and 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M (14,404). It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14,352) and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14,315). These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, meaning the Vega 11 sits in a very tight performance cluster around the 14,300 to 14,400 mark. The Tesla M2090, with an average of 13,075, is 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (12,986), which is actually a negative delta incorrectly stated here in the pack, but the correct reading is that the Tesla is 0.7% faster than the GTX 1660 SUPER. The Tesla is 0.9% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 (13,189), 1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12,940), and 1.1% faster than the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928). This shows that the Tesla M2090, despite its age, still competes with mid-range GPUs from several generations later, while the Vega 11 hangs around the high-end of the integrated graphics spectrum.

The database records the Tesla M2090 with a single win in head-to-head tests (winsB: 1) and the Vega 11 with zero wins. That directly reflects the OpenCL result where the Tesla took the edge. In all other benchmark categories, the Vega 11 has data points that the Tesla lacks, so the overall picture is that the Tesla wins the one comparison available, but the Vega 11 offers a wider range of tested performance.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 is the faster GPU for OpenCL compute workloads. Its 13,075 score versus the Vega 11’s 12,525 represents a 4.2% advantage, which is not negligible for any task that relies heavily on OpenCL. The Tesla also has a higher pixel rate (20.83 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s) and a higher texture rate (41.66 GTexel/s versus 61.60 GTexel/s, note the Vega is actually higher on texture rate, so the data shows the opposite), but the pixel rate and texture rate are the Tesla’s strengths in raw fill rates. The Tesla has 48 ROPs versus the Vega’s 8, so the pixel throughput advantage is built into its architecture.

However, the Vega 11 wins decisively on average benchmark score (14,385 versus 13,075), a 10% advantage. That average is driven by its Metal and Vulkan scores, which are unavailable for the Tesla. If the workload uses Metal or Vulkan, the Vega 11 is the only one of the two that can handle it, and it does so with strong numbers: 17,086 in Metal and 13,543 in Vulkan. The Tesla has no such recorded scores, so for any modern graphics API outside of OpenCL, the Vega 11 is the only option.

For a user who needs a dedicated compute card with no display outputs and a dual-slot design, the Tesla M2090 is the appropriate pick. It has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 384-bit bus and 177.4 GB/s bandwidth, which is a real advantage over the Vega’s system-shared memory. The Vega’s memory bandwidth is labeled as system dependent, so it can vary wildly depending on the host system’s RAM. The Tesla’s fixed 177.4 GB/s is a stable, high-bandwidth figure that supports compute tasks. The Tesla also has a 250 W TDP, which is far higher than the Vega’s 15 W, indicating that the Tesla is built for sustained performance, not power efficiency.

For anyone building a modern system with a need for a low-power IGP that can handle graphics and compute with modern APIs, the Vega 11 is the obvious choice. Its 15 W TDP means it draws almost nothing compared to the Tesla’s 250 W. The Vega is an IGP, so it takes no slot space and needs no power connectors, while the Tesla is dual-slot, requires a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla M2090 wins in raw OpenCL throughput, which is the only direct comparison available. It also wins on fixed memory specifications: 6 GB of GDDR5, 384-bit bus, and 177.4 GB/s bandwidth. These are concrete numbers that the Vega cannot match because its memory is entirely system shared. The Tesla’s pixel rate of 20.83 GPixel/s is nearly double the Vega’s 11.20 GPixel/s, which is an advantage in rasterization-heavy tasks that operate at the pixel level. The Tesla also has 48 ROPs versus 8, which aligns with that pixel rate advantage.

The Vega 11 wins on average benchmark score, Metal performance, and Vulkan performance. The Vega’s 3.942 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio) is a feature the Tesla lacks entirely (no FP16 data), which is crucial for AI inference and some modern rendering techniques. The Vega’s texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s is also higher than the Tesla’s 41.66 GTexel/s, which means the Vega can handle texture-heavy scenes better, despite having fewer ROPs. The Vega’s shading units are 704 versus 512, giving it 37.5% more unified shaders. Its FP32 performance is 1.971 TFLOPS versus 1,332.2 GFLOPS (which is 1.332 TFLOPS), so the Vega is about 48% faster in raw FP32 compute.

In terms of power and integration, the Vega wins decisively. It is an IGP with no power connectors, no slot width, and a 15 W TDP. The Tesla is a dual-slot card with a 250 W TDP and needs a 600 W PSU. The Vega’s process node is 12 nm versus the Tesla’s 40 nm, which explains the power difference. The Vega packs 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, yielding a density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The Tesla has 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, for just 5.8 million per square millimeter. The Vega is significantly more efficient in transistor density.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 has an average benchmark score of 14,385, while the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 has an average of 13,075. The Vega 11’s average is roughly 10% higher.

Q: Does the Tesla M2090 support Vulkan?

A: No. The Tesla M2090 has no Vulkan API support listed in the database, with a null value for Vulkan. The Vega 11 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The Tesla M2090 uses 6 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 384-bit bus and 177.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 11 uses system shared memory, with a bus width and bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Vega 11 has 704 shading units, while the Tesla M2090 has 512 shading units. The Vega 11 has a 37.5% advantage in this area.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Vega 11 has a 15 W TDP, while the Tesla M2090 has a 250 W TDP. The Vega 11 is an integrated GPU with no power connectors, whereas the Tesla requires a 6-pin and 8-pin connector and a suggested 600 W PSU.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Tesla M2090 has a pixel rate of 20.83 GPixel/s, which is higher than the Vega 11’s 11.20 GPixel/s. The Tesla also has 48 ROPs versus 8.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 is built on the GCN 5.0 architecture and uses the Picasso chip. It is a 12 nm part fabricated by GlobalFoundries, with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The transistor density is 23.5 million per square millimeter. This is a modern, power-efficient design that allows the GPU to operate within a 15 W TDP. The Vega 11 is an IGP, so it shares system memory and has no dedicated VRAM. It has 704 shading units, 44 texture map units, and 8 render output units. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

The NVIDIA Tesla M2090 is based on the Fermi 2.0 architecture and uses the GF110 chip. It is a 40 nm part made by TSMC, with 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, yielding a density of just 5.8 million per mm². This makes the Tesla physically larger and less dense, which explains its 250 W TDP. The Tesla has 512 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. It has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 384-bit bus and a fixed bandwidth of 177.4 GB/s. The Tesla supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support.

The process node difference is stark: 12 nm versus 40 nm. The Vega’s smaller node allows for nearly double the transistor density and a fraction of the power draw. The Tesla’s larger node and higher power draw reflect its compute-focused design from 2011. The Tesla also has no display outputs, while the Vega’s outputs are motherboard dependent since it is an IGP. The Tesla is a dual-slot card with a length of 248 mm (9.8 inches), while the Vega has no slot width at all.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in almost every measurable specification. The process node is 12 nm for Vega versus 40 nm for Tesla. The foundry is GlobalFoundries versus TSMC. The Vega has 4,940 million transistors versus 3,000 million for Tesla. The die size is 210 mm² versus 520 mm². Transistor density is 23.5M per mm² versus 5.8M per mm².

The clock speeds are different: the Vega has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1400 MHz, while the Tesla has no base or boost clock recorded. The Tesla’s memory clock is 924 MHz (3.7 Gbps effective), while the Vega’s memory clock is listed as system shared.

Memory size: 6 GB GDDR5 on the Tesla versus system shared on the Vega. The bus width is 384-bit versus system shared. Bandwidth is 177.4 GB/s versus system dependent.

Shading units: 704 versus 512. Texture mapping units: 44 versus 64. ROPs: 8 versus 48. Pixel rate: 11.20 GPixel/s versus 20.83 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 61.60 GTexel/s versus 41.66 GTexel/s. FP32: 1.971 TFLOPS versus 1,332.2 GFLOPS (or 1.332 TFLOPS). FP16: 3.942 TFLOPS (2:1) for Vega, none for Tesla.

TDP: 15 W versus 250 W. Slot width: IGP versus dual-slot. Power connectors: none versus 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin. Suggested PSU: none versus 600 W. Bus interface: IGP versus PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs: motherboard dependent versus no outputs. DirectX: 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_0). OpenGL: 4.6 versus 4.6. Vulkan: 1.3 versus null. Length: null versus 248 mm (9.8 inches). Release date: 2019-07-06 versus 2011-07-24. Predecessor: GCN 3.0 IGP versus Tesla. Successor: Vega II IGP versus Tesla Kepler.