AMD FirePro W5000 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two professional workstation cards, and the outcome is lopsided. In the only head-to-head test available, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, the NVIDIA Tesla K20c scores 11,479 points against the AMD FirePro W5000’s 9,803 points. That is a 17.1% advantage for the NVIDIA card, and it secures the sole win in this comparison. The AMD card records zero wins in the head-to-head data.

Looking at broader context, the Tesla K20c sits at the 51st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the FirePro W5000 sits at the 47th percentile. This places both cards in the middle of the pack, but the NVIDIA card holds a clear edge in raw compute throughput. The Tesla’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528, a 0.4% gap), the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11,627, a 1.3% gap), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680, a 1.7% gap). The FirePro W5000’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (9,780, a 0.2% gap), the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M (9,832, a 0.3% gap), and the NVIDIA Quadro 6000 (9,846, a 0.4% gap).

The Tesla K20c wins where compute density matters most. Its 2,496 shading units and 208 texture mapping units dwarf the FirePro’s 768 shading units and 48 TMUs. The FP32 throughput of 3.524 TFLOPS on the Tesla is more than 2.7 times the FirePro’s 1,267.2 GFLOPS. The pixel rate also favors NVIDIA, with 36.71 GPixel/s versus 26.40 GPixel/s, and the texture rate of 146.8 GTexel/s is nearly four times the AMD card’s 39.60 GTexel/s.

The FirePro W5000 wins in areas that do not show up in the compute benchmark: physical footprint, power draw, and display connectivity. It is a single-slot card at 183 mm length, while the Tesla is a dual-slot card at 267 mm length. The FirePro draws no external power connectors, whereas the Tesla requires a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin configuration. The FirePro also offers display outputs (1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2), while the Tesla has no display outputs at all, making it a pure compute accelerator.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same 28 nm TSMC process node, but they diverge sharply from there. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c uses the GK110 chip under the Kepler architecture, belonging to the Tesla Kepler (Kxx) generation. It integrates 7,080 million transistors across a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The FirePro W5000 uses the Pitcairn chip under GCN 1.0, belonging to the FirePro GCN (Wx000) generation. It packs 2,800 million transistors into a 212 mm² die, which results in a slightly higher density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The Tesla carries 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, producing 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 1300 MHz, or 5.2 Gbps effective. The FirePro has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 102.4 GB/s. Its memory clock is 800 MHz, or 3.2 Gbps effective. The Tesla offers double the memory capacity and more than double the bandwidth.

The compute resource disparity is striking. The Tesla’s 2,496 shading units, 208 TMUs, and 40 ROPs represent a much larger execution engine than the FirePro’s 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Neither card includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as both predate those technologies. Both support DirectX 12 (the Tesla at feature level 11_0, the FirePro at 11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan (1.2.175 for the Tesla, 1.2.170 for the FirePro).

Power and physical design tell different stories. The Tesla is rated at 225 W TDP with a suggested 550 W power supply, while the FirePro is rated at 75 W TDP with a suggested 250 W power supply. The FirePro is a single-slot card, the Tesla is dual-slot. The Tesla uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16, giving the AMD card a newer bus interface despite its smaller compute footprint. The FirePro measures 183 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the Tesla measures 267 mm in length.

Release timing is close: the FirePro launched in August 2012 and the Tesla in November 2012. Both are end-of-life products. Their predecessors are FirePro Terascale and Tesla Fermi respectively, and their successors are Radeon Pro Polaris and Tesla Maxwell.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear compute hierarchy. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c outperforms the AMD FirePro W5000 by 17.1% in the sole Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 11,479 versus 9,803. The Tesla also holds a higher percentile rank overall (51st versus 47th). For any workload that relies on raw FP32 throughput, texture processing, or memory bandwidth, the Tesla is the superior card. Its 3.524 TFLOPS FP32 rating, 146.8 GTexel/s texture rate, and 208.0 GB/s bandwidth are all substantially higher than the FirePro’s corresponding figures.

The AMD FirePro W5000 is not without merit in specific contexts. Its 75 W TDP and single-slot form factor make it suitable for systems with limited power delivery or physical space. It requires no external power connectors and only a 250 W power supply suggestion, whereas the Tesla needs a 550 W power supply and dual power connectors. The FirePro also includes display outputs, making it a functional workstation card for visual output, while the Tesla is a headless compute accelerator with no display outputs.

For a buyer who needs compute acceleration in a dense server or a workstation with strict power budgets, the FirePro’s efficiency profile is attractive. For a buyer who needs maximum compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the Tesla is the clear choice. The benchmark delta of 17.1% is significant, and the architectural advantages of the Tesla (more shading units, more TMUs, more memory, more bandwidth) reinforce that lead.

The launch MSRP of the Tesla K20c was 3,199 USD, while the FirePro W5000 launched at 599 USD. Both cards are end-of-life, so current availability and pricing are determined by the secondary market, not the original launch figures.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20c wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 11,479, compared to the AMD FirePro W5000’s 9,803, a 17.1% advantage.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Tesla K20c has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus with 208.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W5000 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Can either card output video to a display?

A: The FirePro W5000 has 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Tesla K20c has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Tesla K20c is rated at 225 W TDP with a suggested 550 W power supply and requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. The FirePro W5000 is rated at 75 W TDP with a suggested 250 W power supply and requires no external power connectors.

Q: Which card is physically larger?

A: The Tesla K20c is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length. The FirePro W5000 is a single-slot card measuring 183 mm in length and 111 mm in height.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Tesla K20c’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M with a 0.4% score gap. The FirePro W5000’s closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 with a 0.2% gap. Both cards sit near the middle of the overall GPU distribution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it produces a definitive winner. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c scores 11,479 points, while the AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9,803 points. The delta is 17.1% in favor of the Tesla, and the NVIDIA card records the sole win in the head-to-head data, with zero wins for the AMD card.

The magnitude of this gap is meaningful. A 17.1% improvement in a compute benchmark can translate to noticeably shorter render times or faster simulation runs in OpenCL-accelerated applications. The Tesla’s architectural advantages explain the outcome: 2,496 shading units versus 768, 208 TMUs versus 48, and 40 ROPs versus 32. The FP32 throughput of 3.524 TFLOPS is roughly 2.8 times the FirePro’s 1,267.2 GFLOPS, and the texture fill rate of 146.8 GTexel/s is nearly four times the FirePro’s 39.60 GTexel/s.

Memory bandwidth also favors the Tesla. The 208.0 GB/s figure comes from a 320-bit bus and a 1300 MHz memory clock (5.2 Gbps effective). The FirePro’s 102.4 GB/s comes from a 256-bit bus and a 800 MHz clock (3.2 Gbps effective). For memory-bound OpenCL kernels, the Tesla has more than double the bandwidth to feed its larger compute array.

The pixel rate is another clear win for the Tesla: 36.71 GPixel/s versus 26.40 GPixel/s. Even though the Tesla has only 40 ROPs against the FirePro’s 32, the higher clock-related throughput (reflected in the FP32 and texture figures) pushes its pixel output ahead by roughly 39%.

The nearest rival data adds context. The Tesla K20c’s score of 11,479 is within 1.7% of the GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680) and within 1.3% of the Radeon RX 7800 XT (11,627). The FirePro W5000’s score of 9,803 is within 0.4% of the Quadro 6000 (9,846) and within 0.3% of the Quadro M2000M (9,832). This suggests the Tesla competes with a newer generation of consumer and prosumer cards, while the FirePro sits closer to older professional parts.

In practical terms, the benchmark results indicate that the Tesla K20c is the stronger compute card in this pairing. The FirePro W5000’s advantages are limited to power efficiency, physical size, and display connectivity, none of which affect the OpenCL score. For users who prioritize compute performance, the data consistently points to the NVIDIA card.