ATI FireMV 2250 vs NVIDIA RTX A400
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 256MB VRAM FireMV 2250 and 4GB VRAM RTX A400 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
ATI FireMV 2250 's Advantages
Lower TDP (32W vs 50W)
NVIDIA RTX A400 's Advantages
Released 17 years and 3 months late
Boost Clock1762MHz
More VRAM (4GB vs 256GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (96.00GB/s vs 12.80GB/s)
768 additional rendering cores
Score
Graphics Card
Jan 2007
Release Date
Apr 2024
FireMV Multi-View
Generation
Quadro Ampere(Ax000)
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 1.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x8
Clock Speeds
-
Base Clock
1417 MHz
-
Boost Clock
1762 MHz
400 MHz
Memory Clock
1500 MHz
Memory
256MB
Memory Size
4GB
DDR2
Memory Type
GDDR6
128bit
Memory Bus
64bit
12.80GB/s
Bandwidth
96.00GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
SM Count
6
-
Shading Units
768
4
TMUs
24
4
ROPs
16
-
Tensor Cores
24
-
RT Cores
6
-
L1 Cache
128 KB (per SM)
-
L2 Cache
2 MB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
2.400 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
28.19 GPixel/s
2.400 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
42.29 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
2.706 TFLOPS
-
FP32 (float)
2.706 TFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
42.29 GFLOPS
Board Design
32W
TDP
50W
200 W
Suggested PSU
250 W
1x S-Video
1x DMS-59
Outputs
4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
None
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
RV516
GPU Name
GA107
-
-
-
R500
Architecture
Ampere
UMC
Foundry
Samsung
80 nm
Process Size
8 nm
0.107 billion
Transistors
8.7 billion
100 mm²
Die Size
200 mm²
Graphics Features
9.0c (9_3)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
2.1
OpenGL
4.6
N/A
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
-
CUDA
8.6
3.0
Shader Model
6.8
