AMD Radeon Pro 5500M vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm and AMD Radeon Pro 5500M represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by seven years of process technology and architectural evolution. The data paints a clear picture: the Radeon Pro 5500M dominates in every benchmark recorded, winning both head-to-head tests decisively. The Tesla K20Xm, a 2012-era compute accelerator, posts an average benchmark score of 12,625, while the 2019-era Radeon Pro 5500M averages 11,528 — yet this lower average masks the fact that the AMD card wins the two shared tests by margins of 79% and 44.6%. The verdict from the data is that the Radeon Pro 5500M is the superior performer in modern workloads, but the Tesla K20Xm retains relevance in specific legacy compute scenarios, particularly where its 6 GB of GDDR5 memory and 384-bit bus provide a bandwidth advantage. The Radeon Pro 5500M wins on raw speed, efficiency, and API support, making it the clear choice for most users, while the Tesla K20Xm appeals only to those needing its specific compute characteristics or running software optimized for Kepler architecture.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins every head-to-head comparison, taking both tests with substantial margins. In Geekbench Metal, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38,235 versus the Tesla K20Xm's 8,035 — a 79% advantage that reflects the AMD card's modern RDNA 1.0 architecture and its ability to leverage Metal API optimizations. In Geekbench OpenCL, the margin narrows but remains decisive: 31,088 versus 17,215, a 44.6% lead for the AMD card. The data suggests the Radeon Pro 5500M is the better choice for anyone running contemporary applications, particularly those using Metal or Vulkan APIs, where the AMD card also posts a strong 35,134 Vulkan score. The Tesla K20Xm's lone advantage lies in its memory subsystem: 249.6 GB/s bandwidth across a 384-bit bus, versus 192.0 GB/s on a 128-bit bus for the AMD card. This could matter for bandwidth-bound compute tasks, but the Radeon Pro 5500M compensates with higher pixel rate (46.40 GPixel/s vs 40.99 GPixel/s) and higher FP32 throughput (4.454 TFLOPS vs 3.935 TFLOPS). The Tesla K20Xm also carries a 235 W TDP, nearly three times the Radeon Pro 5500M's 85 W, making the AMD card dramatically more power-efficient. For new purchases, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the rational choice; the Tesla K20Xm only makes sense if you specifically need its Kepler compute characteristics or require its dual-slot, no-output server form factor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is overwhelmingly faster in Geekbench Metal, scoring 38,235 versus the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm's 8,035. This 79% delta suggests the RDNA 1.0 architecture is far better optimized for Apple's Metal API than the Kepler-based Tesla.

Q: Does the Tesla K20Xm have any benchmark where it wins?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests recorded, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins both. The Tesla K20Xm wins zero benchmark comparisons, though it does have a higher average benchmark score (12,625) than the Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528) when considering all recorded tests, likely due to the AMD card's lower scores in DirectX and Passmark tests.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 249.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s. The Tesla has 30% more bandwidth, but the AMD card has 33% more capacity.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern APIs?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The Tesla K20Xm supports DirectX 12 (11_0), Vulkan 1.2.175, and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD card has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has a TDP of 235 W, while the Radeon Pro 5500M has a TDP of 85 W. This means the AMD card uses 64% less power, making it far more suitable for portable or power-constrained systems.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare to each GPU?

A: The Tesla K20Xm's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT, which scores 12,710, just 0.7% higher. The Radeon Pro 5500M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla K20c, which scores 11,479, just 0.4% lower — interestingly, this is a sibling of the Tesla K20Xm.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast. The Tesla K20Xm uses the GK110 chip on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process. It packs 7,080 million transistors onto a 561 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the Radeon Pro 5500M uses the Navi 14 chip on AMD's RDNA 1.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 7 nm process. It contains 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, achieving a density of 40.5 million per square millimeter — over three times denser. This process advantage is fundamental: the Radeon Pro 5500M delivers more performance in a much smaller package. The Kepler architecture was designed for compute-heavy workloads, featuring 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The RDNA 1.0 architecture takes a different approach, with 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, but compensates with higher clock speeds (1450 MHz boost versus the Tesla's unspecified base and boost clocks). The Radeon Pro 5500M also supports FP16 computation at 8.909 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio, while the Tesla K20Xm has no FP16 support listed. Both lack ray tracing and tensor cores, but the AMD card has a more modern DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level versus the Tesla's 11_0, and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.175). The Tesla K20Xm is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, while the Radeon Pro 5500M is designed for portable devices with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals stark contrasts. Process node: 28 nm for the Tesla, 7 nm for the Radeon Pro 5500M. Transistor count: 7,080 million versus 6,400 million, but the Tesla's die is 561 mm² versus 158 mm² for the AMD card. Memory: 6 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus versus 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. Bandwidth favors the Tesla at 249.6 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s. Clock speeds: the Tesla lists no base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), while the Radeon Pro 5500M has a 1000 MHz base and 1450 MHz boost, with memory at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Shading units: 2,688 versus 1,536. TMUs: 224 versus 96. ROPs: 48 versus 32. Pixel rate: 40.99 GPixel/s versus 46.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 164.0 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s. FP32: 3.935 TFLOPS versus 4.454 TFLOPS. FP16: not listed versus 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP: 235 W versus 85 W. The Tesla is dual-slot with no power connectors listed and requires a 550 W PSU; the Radeon Pro 5500M has no power connectors and no suggested PSU. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs: none versus portable device dependent. The Tesla's launch MSRP was 7,699 USD; the AMD card has no launch MSRP listed. The Tesla is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long; the AMD card has no dimensions listed. Both are end-of-life, with the Tesla released on 2012-11-11 and the Radeon Pro 5500M on 2019-11-12.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmarks tell a consistent story of AMD dominance. In Geekbench Metal, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38,235 against the Tesla K20Xm's 8,035, a delta of -79% from the AMD card's perspective. This is a massive gap, suggesting the Kepler architecture is virtually unusable for modern Metal workloads. The Radeon Pro 5500M's Metal score is also higher than its OpenCL score (38,235 versus 31,088), indicating strong Metal optimization. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 31,088 versus 17,215 for the Tesla K20Xm, a 44.6% advantage. This narrower margin reflects OpenCL's more universal nature, but the AMD card still wins convincingly. The Tesla K20Xm's average benchmark score of 12,625 is actually higher than the Radeon Pro 5500M's 11,528, but this is misleading — the AMD card has more benchmark results, including lower Passmark scores in DirectX tests (36 for DX10, 42 for DX11, 29 for DX12, 96 for DX9) and a 6,732 Passmark G3D score. The Tesla K20Xm only has two recorded benchmarks (both Geekbench), which skews its average upward. The head-to-head results show 0 wins for the Tesla and 2 wins for the Radeon Pro 5500M. The percentile rankings are close: the Tesla sits at the 52nd percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD card is at the 51st percentile. This suggests that despite the Radeon Pro 5500M's clear win in direct comparison, both cards are mid-pack performers in the broader GPU landscape.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the data, the Radeon Pro 5500M wins in every measured category. It dominates in Metal performance (38,235 versus 8,035), OpenCL performance (31,088 versus 17,215), and offers additional Vulkan capability (35,134) that the Tesla lacks entirely. The AMD card also wins on efficiency, with an 85 W TDP versus 235 W, making it suitable for laptops and portable devices. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory provides more capacity for modern workloads, and its FP16 support (8.909 TFLOPS) enables accelerated half-precision compute. The Radeon Pro 5500M's higher pixel rate (46.40 GPixel/s) and FP32 throughput (4.454 TFLOPS) give it raw compute advantages. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface doubles the bandwidth per lane compared to the Tesla's PCIe 3.0 x16. The Tesla K20Xm's only theoretical advantages are its 249.6 GB/s memory bandwidth (30% higher) and its higher texture rate (164.0 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s), along with its server-oriented dual-slot form factor and lack of display outputs, which could appeal to dedicated compute nodes. However, these advantages do not translate into any benchmark victories in the recorded data. The Tesla's 6 GB memory on a 384-bit bus could benefit memory-bound workloads, but the Radeon Pro 5500M's superior compute performance and modern API support make it the better choice for virtually all use cases. The data suggests the Radeon Pro 5500M is the winner for general-purpose computing, creative workloads, and any application leveraging modern graphics APIs, while the Tesla K20Xm remains relevant only for niche legacy compute environments or applications specifically optimized for Kepler's compute capabilities.