AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has an average benchmark score of 12,625, while the AMD Radeon Pro 450 has an average of 10,804. The Tesla K20Xm sits at the 52nd percentile among all GPUs, whereas the Radeon Pro 450 is at the 49th percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm scores 17,215 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Pro 450 scores 9,002. This represents a 91.2% advantage for the Tesla K20Xm, making it the decisive winner in this compute-oriented workload.

Q: Which GPU wins in Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins the Geekbench Metal test with a score of 12,893, compared to the Tesla K20Xm's 8,035. The delta is 37.7% in favor of the Radeon Pro 450, which is a substantial margin.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The Tesla K20Xm features 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding 249.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 450 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 81.28 GB/s.

Q: How do their shading unit counts differ?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has 2,688 shading units, whereas the Radeon Pro 450 has 640. The Tesla also has more texture mapping units (224 vs. 40) and more render output units (48 vs. 16).

Q: What is the manufacturing process for each chip?

A: The Tesla K20Xm uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the Radeon Pro 450 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon chip has a higher transistor density of 24.4M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm² for the Tesla.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between two very different workloads. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm wins in OpenCL, a compute-oriented API commonly used for general-purpose GPU tasks, scientific simulation, and data processing. Its score of 17,215 is not just higher, it is nearly double the Radeon Pro 450's 9,002, a 91.2% advantage. This is the dominant win in the head-to-head comparison and reflects the Tesla's design philosophy as a dedicated compute accelerator.

The AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins decisively in Metal, Apple's graphics API, with a score of 12,893 versus 8,035. That 37.7% lead is substantial and indicates that the Radeon Pro 450 is better optimized for the graphics and rendering tasks that Metal typically handles, especially in macOS environments where it was designed to operate. The Radeon Pro 450 also supports Vulkan 1.3, whereas the Tesla K20Xm is limited to Vulkan 1.2.175, giving the AMD card a more modern API feature set.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL, the Tesla K20Xm is the clear choice. For those focused on Metal-based graphics workloads, the Radeon Pro 450 holds a significant edge. Each GPU wins one benchmark, so the decision hinges entirely on the target application and API.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK110 chip, released in 2012 as part of the Tesla Kepler generation. It uses a 28 nm process at TSMC and packs 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die. The transistor density is 12.6M per mm², reflecting the older, larger process node.

The AMD Radeon Pro 450 is based on the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Baffin chip, released in 2016 under the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation. It uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries and contains 3,000 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die. The transistor density is 24.4M per mm², which is nearly double that of the Tesla, a direct benefit of the newer process technology.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The Tesla K20Xm has 2,688 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Radeon Pro 450 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Tesla's raw execution resources are over four times larger in shading unit count, which explains its massive OpenCL advantage. However, the Radeon Pro 450 supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (1,024.0 GFLOPS each), while the Tesla K20Xm has no listed FP16 capability, a notable feature for mixed-precision workloads.

The Radeon Pro 450 also supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Tesla K20Xm is limited to Vulkan 1.2.175 and DirectX 12 (11_0). The Tesla has no display outputs, as it is a compute accelerator, whereas the Radeon Pro 450's display outputs are described as portable device dependent, reflecting its intended use in mobile workstations.

Specification Differences

The bus interface differs: the Tesla K20Xm uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Radeon Pro 450 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, halving the available host bandwidth for the AMD card. The Tesla K20Xm is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, while the Radeon Pro 450 is an MXM module, a compact form factor for laptops. The Tesla has a TDP of 235 W and requires a 550 W power supply, whereas the Radeon Pro 450 has a TDP of just 35 W and lists no suggested PSU, reflecting its low-power mobile design.

Memory clocks are close, with the Tesla at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) and the Radeon at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), but the bus width differences create a large bandwidth gap: 249.6 GB/s for the Tesla versus 81.28 GB/s for the Radeon. The Tesla has 6 GB of VRAM versus 2 GB on the Radeon, a threefold capacity advantage.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the resource disparity. The Tesla achieves 40.99 GPixel/s and 164.0 GTexel/s, while the Radeon Pro 450 manages 12.80 GPixel/s and 32.00 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.935 TFLOPS for the Tesla versus 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1.024 TFLOPS) for the Radeon. The Tesla was released on 2012-11-11 with a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD, while the Radeon Pro 450 launched 2016-10-29 with no listed MSRP. Both are end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the Tesla K20Xm at 17,215 versus the Radeon Pro 450 at 9,002, a delta of 91.2%. This is the largest single-benchmark gap in the comparison and aligns with the Tesla's massive shading unit count (2,688 vs. 640) and higher memory bandwidth (249.6 GB/s vs. 81.28 GB/s). The OpenCL score is more than double, indicating that the Tesla's compute architecture scales effectively in this workload.

In Geekbench Metal, the Radeon Pro 450 reverses the result with a score of 12,893 versus 8,035, a 37.7% lead. This is notable because the Tesla has far more raw hardware resources, yet the Radeon Pro 450 wins by a wide margin. The Metal API, optimized for AMD GPUs in macOS systems, clearly favors the Radeon's architecture. The Radeon Pro 450 also has a Vulkan score of 10,518, a test that the Tesla K20Xm does not have recorded, further indicating the AMD card's strength in modern cross-platform graphics APIs.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database, the Tesla K20Xm's average score of 12,625 is within 1.6% of several competitors: the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT (12,710, 0.7% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773, 1.2% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, 1.6% higher), and AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831, 1.6% higher). This places the Tesla in a tightly contested mid-range cluster despite its age.

The Radeon Pro 450's average of 10,804 is close to the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10,761, 0.4% lower), NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10,883, 0.7% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10,690, 1.1% lower), and AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10,629, 1.7% lower). The Radeon Pro 450 is competitive with these older and entry-level GPUs, but its 49th percentile ranking places it slightly below the Tesla's 52nd percentile in overall standing.

The overall wins are split at one each. The Tesla K20Xm dominates compute-heavy OpenCL workloads, while the Radeon Pro 450 excels in Metal-based graphics tasks. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the priority is raw compute throughput or graphics API compatibility and efficiency.