AMD FirePro M6100 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In the only recorded benchmark comparison, the AMD FirePro M6100 defeats the NVIDIA Tesla K20c decisively. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the FirePro M6100 scoring 13,354 points against 11,479 points for the Tesla K20c, a 16.3% advantage. This is a substantial margin in a compute-focused workload, indicating that the mobile AMD part delivers higher raw OpenCL throughput than the larger, higher-power NVIDIA accelerator.

The 16.3% delta puts the FirePro M6100 in a clear leadership position. For context, the FirePro M6100 sits at the 54th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Tesla K20c rests at the 51st percentile. The gap between these percentiles is modest, but the score difference itself is not. The FirePro M6100's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M, scores 13,356 points, a 0% delta, meaning the FirePro effectively trades blows with a much newer mobile Radeon. The Tesla K20c, meanwhile, trails its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, by 0.4% (11,528 points), and sits 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680 points).

The data shows that despite the Tesla K20c's much larger silicon and far higher transistor count, the FirePro M6100 wins the sole head-to-head test. This is not a narrow victory; a 16.3% lead in OpenCL is significant. The FirePro M6100 also outperforms the Tesla K20c in the broader context of their respective rival pools. The FirePro's closest competitors all score within a tight band of roughly 13,321 to 13,407 points, while the Tesla's closest competitors range from 11,261 to 11,680 points. The FirePro operates in a higher performance tier entirely.

One might expect the Tesla K20c, with 2,496 shading units and 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, to dominate. The recorded benchmark says otherwise. The FirePro M6100, with 896 shading units and 1.971 TFLOPS, posts a higher OpenCL score. This suggests that architectural efficiency and driver optimization play a larger role than raw theoretical throughput in this particular workload. The Tesla K20c's compute capability is not in question, but the benchmark results indicate that the FirePro M6100 extracts more usable performance from its smaller design.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD FirePro M6100 uses the Emerald chip built on GCN 2.0, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c uses the GK110 chip built on Kepler. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The transistor counts differ enormously. The Tesla K20c packs 7,080 million transistors onto a 561 mm² die, while the FirePro M6100 integrates 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The transistor density is comparable, 12.6M per mm² for the Tesla versus 13.0M per mm² for the FirePro, but the physical scale is vastly different. The Tesla K20c is more than three times larger in die area and holds well over three times the transistor count.

Compute resources also diverge sharply. The Tesla K20c has 2,496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 40 render output units. The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Tesla's theoretical FP32 throughput is 3.524 TFLOPS versus 1.971 TFLOPS for the FirePro. Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: the Tesla delivers 36.71 GPixel/s and 146.8 GTexel/s, while the FirePro delivers 17.60 GPixel/s and 61.60 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations are also fundamentally different. The FirePro M6100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla K20c uses 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 208.0 GB/s. The memory clock differs as well: the FirePro runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the Tesla runs at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The Tesla's wider bus compensates for its lower clock speed, resulting in more than double the bandwidth.

Power and form factor tell a contrasting story. The Tesla K20c has a 225 W TDP, uses a dual-slot design, and requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. It also suggests a 550 W power supply. The FirePro M6100 is an MXM module with no power connectors, designed for portable systems. The Tesla is 267 mm long (10.5 inches), while the FirePro's dimensions are not recorded. The Tesla has no display outputs, while the FirePro's outputs are dependent on the portable device it is installed into.

API support differs in one notable aspect. The FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Tesla K20c supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan support is present on both, with the FirePro at version 1.2.170 and the Tesla at version 1.2.175. The Tesla also carries a launch MSRP of 3,199 USD, a figure that reflects its enterprise positioning.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13,354 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c scores 11,479 points. The FirePro leads by 16.3%.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla K20c have more shading units?

A: Yes. The Tesla K20c has 2,496 shading units, while the FirePro M6100 has 896. The Tesla also has 208 TMUs and 40 ROPs, compared to 56 TMUs and 16 ROPs on the FirePro.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Tesla K20c provides 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth using 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus. The FirePro M6100 provides 96.00 GB/s using 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Tesla K20c has a 225 W TDP and requires 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested 550 W power supply. The FirePro M6100 has no recorded TDP and uses no power connectors, as it is an MXM module.

Q: Which card has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The Tesla K20c delivers 36.71 GPixel/s and 146.8 GTexel/s. The FirePro M6100 delivers 17.60 GPixel/s and 61.60 GTexel/s.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The FirePro M6100 was released on 2014-05-26, and the Tesla K20c was released on 2012-11-11.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro M6100 | NVIDIA Tesla K20c |

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

| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | Emerald | GK110 |

| Transistors | 2,080 million | 7,080 million |

| Die size | 160 mm² | 561 mm² |

| Transistor density | 13.0M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Memory size | 2 GB | 5 GB |

| Memory bus | 128 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 208.0 GB/s |

| Memory clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) |

| Shading units | 896 | 2,496 |

| TMUs | 56 | 208 |

| ROPs | 16 | 40 |

| Pixel rate | 17.60 GPixel/s | 36.71 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 61.60 GTexel/s | 146.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.971 TFLOPS | 3.524 TFLOPS |

| TDP | Not recorded | 225 W |

| Slot width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 550 W |

| Bus interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| DirectX support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan support | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Length | Not recorded | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Release date | 2014-05-26 | 2012-11-11 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 3,199 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro M6100 wins the only benchmark in the database. Its 13,354 OpenCL score places it in a higher performance band than the Tesla K20c's 11,479. The FirePro also benefits from a later release date (2014 versus 2012) and a more modern DirectX implementation (12_0 versus 11_0). For any workload measured by Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro M6100 is the stronger performer.

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c wins on raw hardware specifications across the board. It has more than double the FP32 throughput (3.524 TFLOPS versus 1.971 TFLOPS), more than double the memory bandwidth (208.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s), and more than double the pixel and texture rates. It also has 2.5 GB more memory and a 320-bit bus. For tasks that scale with theoretical compute capacity, memory capacity, or fill rates, the Tesla K20c has the specification advantage.

The Tesla K20c is also the only one of the two with a recorded TDP, power connector requirements, and a suggested power supply, making it a proper desktop accelerator. The FirePro M6100's MXM form factor and lack of power connectors indicate it is meant for mobile workstations, not standalone compute nodes. The Tesla's lack of display outputs reinforces its role as a dedicated compute device, while the FirePro's display output is tied to the host device.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD FirePro M6100 delivers a 16.3% higher OpenCL score than the NVIDIA Tesla K20c. If the selection criterion is measured performance in the database's sole test, the FirePro M6100 is the correct choice. Its 13,354 points place it in the 54th percentile, while the Tesla K20c's 11,479 points place it in the 51st percentile. The FirePro also matches or nearly matches much newer AMD mobile GPUs, with a 0% delta against the Radeon RX 5500M and a 0.3% lead over the Radeon Pro 555X.

However, the Tesla K20c remains relevant for tasks that rely on raw specifications rather than the recorded OpenCL score. Its 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and 5 GB of memory make it a formidable device for workloads that are bound by memory capacity or theoretical throughput. Its 2,496 shading units and 208 TMUs dwarf the FirePro's 896 and 56, respectively. For compute tasks that are not well represented by Geekbench OpenCL, the Tesla K20c's hardware profile could potentially outperform the FirePro, but the database does not contain evidence to support that claim.

The production status of both cards is end-of-life, so neither is a candidate for new deployments. For a user choosing between these two specific units based on recorded data, the FirePro M6100 wins the benchmark comparison. For a user who values memory capacity, compute throughput, and fill rates as documented in the specifications, the Tesla K20c offers a substantially larger hardware envelope. The verdict depends on the workload, but the measured data favors AMD.