Tesla M2090 vs Iris Plus Graphics 640
Tesla M2090
Popular choices:
Iris Plus Graphics 640
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The Tesla M2090 is positioned at rank #379 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Tesla M2090
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Iris Plus Graphics 640 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2011). The Iris Plus Graphics 640 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Tesla M2090 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla M2090 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.5% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (512 MB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Iris Plus Graphics 640.
| Insight | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (248mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Tesla M2090 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Tesla M2090 and Iris Plus Graphics 640
Tesla M2090
The Tesla M2090 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 25 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 651 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,400 points.
Iris Plus Graphics 640
The Iris Plus Graphics 640 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 3 2017. It features the Generation 9.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1100 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 14 nm++ process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,353 points.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla M2090 scores 1,400 and the Iris Plus Graphics 640 reaches 1,353 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla M2090 is built on Fermi 2.0 while the Iris Plus Graphics 640 uses Generation 9.5, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm++. Shader units: 512 (Tesla M2090) vs 384 (Iris Plus Graphics 640). Raw compute: 1.332 TFLOPS (Tesla M2090) vs 0.8448 TFLOPS (Iris Plus Graphics 640).
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,400+3% | 1,353 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Generation 9.5 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm++ |
| Shading Units | 512+33% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.332 TFLOPS+58% | 0.8448 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48+700% | 6 |
| TMUs | 64+33% | 48 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Tesla M2090 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Iris Plus Graphics 640 has 0 MB. The Tesla M2090 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs System.
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | System |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (Tesla M2090) vs 12 (12_1) (Iris Plus Graphics 640). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (FL 11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Supported codecs: CUDA,OpenCL (Tesla M2090) vs H.264,H.265,VP8,VP9 (Iris Plus Graphics 640).
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | Quick Sync Video |
| Decoder | — | Quick Sync Video |
| Codecs | CUDA,OpenCL | H.264,H.265,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla M2090 draws 250W versus the Iris Plus Graphics 640's 15W — a 177.4% difference. The Iris Plus Graphics 640 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla M2090) vs 0W (Iris Plus Graphics 640). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 248mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 15W-94% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 0W-100% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 248mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 5.6 | 90.2+1511% |
Value Analysis
The Tesla M2090 launched at $2500 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Iris Plus Graphics 640 launched at $0 and now averages $0. The Iris Plus Graphics 640 costs 100+% less ($40 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 35.0 (Tesla M2090) vs Infinity (Iris Plus Graphics 640) — the Iris Plus Graphics 640 offers Infinity% better value. The Iris Plus Graphics 640 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2011).
| Feature | Tesla M2090 | Iris Plus Graphics 640 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2500 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 35.0 | Infinity |
| Codename | GF110 | Kaby Lake GT3e |
| Release | July 25 2011 | January 3 2017 |
| Ranking | #530 | #767 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla M2090 and Iris Plus Graphics 640
