AMD FirePro W5100 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c and AMD FirePro W5100 represent two distinct approaches to professional graphics, separated by a generation of design philosophy. The benchmark data shows a clear, though narrow, overall victory for the AMD FirePro W5100, which outperforms the Tesla K20c in the sole head-to-head test while also offering a wider range of software API support. This analysis will dissect the numbers to clarify where each card excels and which profile of user is best served by the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The quantitative comparison between these two cards is limited to a single benchmark test: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the AMD FirePro W5100 scores 11,888 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c scores 11,479 points. This gives the AMD card a 3.4% advantage, a relatively modest lead that indicates the two are closely matched in raw compute performance for this particular workload.

The margin is small, but the implications are significant. The FirePro W5100’s higher score suggests that its architecture is more efficient at translating its resources into OpenCL results. By contrast, the Tesla K20c’s lower score, despite its much larger physical footprint, shows that its design priorities lie elsewhere. The delta of -3.4% for the Tesla K20c is a narrow miss; it is not a decisive defeat, but it does establish the FirePro W5100 as the faster card in this specific test.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape from the data, the Tesla K20c’s average score of 11,479 places it just 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528) and 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680). It is 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (11,261). This positions the Tesla K20c in a tightly contested mid-range bracket. The FirePro W5100’s average score of 12,847, which includes its Vulkan result, is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831) and 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773). It is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870). These rival comparisons show that the FirePro W5100 sits in a slightly higher performance tier than the Tesla K20c, even though the delta in the direct OpenCL test is small.

The single benchmark win for the FirePro W5100 is its Geekbench OpenCL score. The Tesla K20c has zero wins in the head-to-head data. This is a clear, if limited, verdict in direct competition. The data does not show any test where the Tesla K20c comes out ahead, so any analysis of its strengths must be inferred from its architecture and feature set rather than from a direct benchmark victory.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5100 wins in the direct compute comparison and in API compatibility. Its OpenCL score of 11,888 is higher, and its support for DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170 is more modern than the Tesla K20c’s DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The data shows the FirePro W5100 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 13,805, a test the Tesla K20c does not have a result for. This suggests the FirePro W5100 is better suited for workloads that leverage modern graphics APIs, which is a critical advantage for a professional card intended for longevity in software support.

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c’s wins are not in benchmark scores but in its raw hardware specifications. It has a significantly larger die size of 561 mm² compared to the FirePro W5100’s 160 mm², and it packs 7,080 million transistors versus 2,080 million. This hardware investment translates into a higher theoretical throughput. The Tesla K20c’s FP32 performance is 3.524 TFLOPS, which is 2.5 times higher than the FirePro W5100’s 1,428.5 GFLOPS. Similarly, its texture rate is 146.8 GTexel/s versus 44.64 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate is 36.71 GPixel/s versus 14.88 GPixel/s. In terms of memory bandwidth, the Tesla K20c offers 208.0 GB/s over a 320-bit bus, compared to the FirePro W5100’s 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus.

The data shows a clear split: the FirePro W5100 wins on efficiency and modern API execution, while the Tesla K20c wins on peak computational capability. The FirePro W5100 achieves its results with 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the Tesla K20c uses 2,496 shading units, 208 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The FirePro W5100’s ability to match or exceed the Tesla K20c in the OpenCL test with only a fraction of the hardware resources confirms its architectural efficiency. For users running software that is well-optimized for GCN 2.0, the FirePro W5100 is the more effective choice.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK110 chip, while the AMD FirePro W5100 uses the GCN 2.0 architecture with the Bonaire chip. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but there the similarity ends. The Tesla K20c’s die is 561 mm² and houses 7,080 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.6M / mm². The FirePro W5100’s die is just 160 mm² with 2,080 million transistors, yielding a higher density of 13.0M / mm². This shows that AMD packed its transistors more tightly, albeit with a much smaller total budget.

Memory configurations also differ significantly. The Tesla K20c uses 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, providing 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 1300 MHz, with 5.2 Gbps effective. The FirePro W5100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, giving it only 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, with a memory clock of 1500 MHz and 6 Gbps effective. The Tesla K20c’s larger bus width is its key advantage for memory-intensive tasks, while the FirePro W5100’s higher clock speed cannot compensate for its narrow bus.

The power and physical profiles are also opposite. The Tesla K20c has a TDP of 225 W, requires a dual-slot cooler, and needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector. The FirePro W5100, in contrast, has a TDP of just 50 W, is a single-slot card, and requires no external power connectors. The suggested PSU for the Tesla K20c is 550 W, while the FirePro W5100 only suggests 250 W. The Tesla K20c’s length is 267 mm, while the FirePro W5100 is 173 mm long and 111 mm high. The FirePro W5100 also has 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the Tesla K20c has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator.

In terms of software, the FirePro W5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Tesla K20c is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the FirePro W5100 has Vulkan 1.2.170 and the Tesla K20c has Vulkan 1.2.175. The generation names reflect this: the Tesla K20c is from the "Tesla Kepler (Kxx)" generation, while the FirePro W5100 is from the "FirePro GCN (Wx100)" generation. The Tesla K20c’s predecessor is "Tesla Fermi" and its successor is "Tesla Maxwell." The FirePro W5100’s predecessor is "FirePro Terascale" and its successor is "Radeon Pro Polaris."

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload. For users who need a card that can be installed in a compact workstation with a modest power supply, the AMD FirePro W5100 is the logical selection. Its 50 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it an incredibly easy card to integrate into any system. Its higher OpenCL score and modern DirectX 12 (12_0) support make it the better choice for general-purpose compute and applications that leverage newer APIs. The data shows it is the more efficient and versatile card for a typical professional workstation.

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c is the choice for users who prioritize raw compute density over efficiency and practicality. Its 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 208.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth are the highest figures in this comparison. For a compute cluster or a server environment where power and space are not constraints, the Tesla K20c offers a much higher ceiling for performance. However, its lack of display outputs means it must be paired with a secondary graphics card for any visual output. The data does not show it winning any direct benchmark, so its superiority is purely theoretical, based on its specifications.

The benchmark results indicate that the FirePro W5100 is the better all-rounder. It wins the only head-to-head test, supports more display outputs, and has a far more practical physical footprint. The Tesla K20c is a specialized piece of hardware for a specific purpose: high-throughput compute. The FirePro W5100 is a professional workstation card that can handle compute and display output. The verdict is straightforward: pick the FirePro W5100 for versatility and efficiency, or pick the Tesla K20c for maximum compute scaling in a controlled environment.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 scores 11,888 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 3.4% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla K20c’s score of 11,479.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20c has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W power supply, while the AMD FirePro W5100 has a TDP of 50 W and only suggests a 250 W power supply.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla K20c have video outputs?

A: No, the Tesla K20c has no display outputs. The AMD FirePro W5100, in contrast, has 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20c provides 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 320-bit bus, while the AMD FirePro W5100 offers 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card has better DirectX support?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 has DirectX 12 (12_0) support, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 has an average benchmark score of 12,847, which includes a Vulkan score of 13,805, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c has an average score of 11,479.