ATI FirePro 2450 Multi View vs AMD Radeon R9 285
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 256MB VRAM FirePro 2450 Multi View and 2GB VRAM Radeon R9 285 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
ATI FirePro 2450 Multi View 's Advantages
Lower TDP (32W vs 190W)
AMD Radeon R9 285 's Advantages
Released 5 years and 8 months late
More VRAM (2GB vs 256GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (176.0GB/s vs 6.400GB/s)
1752 additional rendering cores
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
FirePro 2450 Multi View
0.032 TFLOPS
Radeon R9 285
+10181%
3.29 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jan 2009
Release Date
Sep 2014
FirePro Multi-View
Generation
Volcanic Islands
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
400 MHz
Memory Clock
1375 MHz
Memory
256MB
Memory Size
2GB
DDR3
Memory Type
GDDR5
64bit
Memory Bus
256bit
6.400GB/s
Bandwidth
176.0GB/s
Render Config
2
Compute Units
28
-
-
-
40
Shading Units
1792
4
TMUs
112
4
ROPs
32
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L1 Cache
16 KB (per CU)
-
L2 Cache
512 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
1.600 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
29.38 GPixel/s
1.600 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
102.8 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
3.290 TFLOPS
32.00 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
3.290 TFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
205.6 GFLOPS
Board Design
32W
TDP
190W
200 W
Suggested PSU
450 W
1x VHDCI
Outputs
2x DVI
1x HDMI 1.4a
1x DisplayPort 1.2
None
Power Connectors
2x 6-pin
Graphics Processor
RV620
GPU Name
Tonga
RV620 PRO
(215-0670006)
GPU Variant
Tonga PRO
(215-0851128)
TeraScale
Architecture
GCN 3.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
55 nm
Process Size
28 nm
0.181 billion
Transistors
5 billion
67 mm²
Die Size
366 mm²
Graphics Features
10.1 (10_1)
DirectX
12 (12_0)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
N/A
OpenCL
2.1
N/A
Vulkan
1.2.170
-
-
-
4.1
Shader Model
6.5
