AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs NVIDIA Tesla M60 Comparison

NVIDIA’s Tesla M60 and AMD’s Radeon Pro W5500X are both end-of-life professional accelerators, but they represent opposite ends of the design spectrum: a dual-GPU compute board from 2015 versus a single-GPU Apple MPX card from 2019. The benchmark data shows a narrow overall edge for the Tesla M60, which posts a higher average score of 30,490 compared to 27,973 for the W5500X, placing them at the 75th and 73rd percentiles of all GPUs, respectively. However, their performance profiles are not directly comparable due to different test suites, and the W5500X counters with superior efficiency, modern memory, and a higher raw FP32 throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share no common benchmark tests in the data, so a direct apples-to-apples comparison is impossible. Instead, the analysis must rely on their respective average scores and how each fares against its own nearest rivals. The Tesla M60’s average score of 30,490 places it in a tight cluster with consumer gaming GPUs: it is essentially tied with the NVIDIA CMP 70HX at 30,476 (0% delta), just 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6700 at 30,433, and 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6800 at 30,095. The M60’s strongest relative showing is against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti, where it leads by 1.8% (30,490 vs 29,945). This is notable because the RTX 3070 Ti is a much newer architecture, yet the M60’s raw compute density keeps it competitive in synthetic workloads.

The W5500X, with an average score of 27,973, sits in a slightly lower performance bracket. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 28,020, which beats it by 0.2% (deltaPct of -0.2 for the AMD card). The W5500X edges out the AMD Radeon RX 7800M by 0.3% (27,973 vs 27,883) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 by 0.5% (27,973 vs 27,839). The most significant gap is against the AMD FirePro S7150, where the W5500X trails by 0.5% (27,973 vs 28,117). These deltas are all within a 1% band, indicating that the W5500X is competitively positioned against previous-generation professional and gaming hardware, but it does not reach the M60’s absolute score level.

In terms of individual benchmark results, the Tesla M60 achieves 29,506 in Geekbench OpenCL and 31,473 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Vulkan score is notably higher, suggesting the Maxwell 2.0 architecture handles that API more efficiently. The W5500X’s only listed benchmark is 27,973 in Geekbench Metal, which reflects its design target for Apple’s ecosystem. This score is 4.5% lower than the M60’s average, but the different APIs make this a qualitative rather than quantitative gap. The data shows the M60 leads in raw compute scores, but the W5500X’s single Metal result is not a full measure of its capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla M60 wins on absolute performance and multi-API compatibility. Its average score of 30,490 is 9% higher than the W5500X’s 27,973, and it has benchmark results across both OpenCL and Vulkan, whereas the W5500X only has a Metal result. This makes the M60 the stronger choice for workloads that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan compute, such as general-purpose GPU tasks or cross-platform rendering pipelines. The M60’s 75th percentile ranking versus the W5500X’s 73rd further confirms its higher standing in the overall GPU hierarchy.

The W5500X wins on efficiency and modern feature support. It delivers 5.398 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 11.9% higher than the M60’s 4.825 TFLOPS, while consuming a 125 W TDP compared to the M60’s 300 W. The power efficiency is stark: the W5500X achieves more raw compute per watt by a wide margin. The W5500X also has a significantly lower suggested PSU requirement of 300 W versus 700 W for the M60. Additionally, the W5500X is built on a 7 nm process versus 28 nm, which explains its density advantage (40.5M transistors per mm² vs 13.1M).

The W5500X also wins on memory technology. It uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is 39.7% higher than the M60’s 160.4 GB/s from GDDR5. Although the W5500X has a narrower 128-bit bus versus the M60’s 256-bit bus, the faster GDDR6 clocks (14 Gbps effective vs 5 Gbps effective) more than compensate. For memory-bound tasks like high-resolution texture streaming or large data sets, the W5500X would have a clear advantage. The W5500X also has display outputs (2x HDMI 2.0b), while the M60 has none, making the AMD card suitable for direct display tasks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The Tesla M60 uses the GM204 chip on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It packs 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, yielding a density of 13.1M transistors per mm². The M60 features 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its base clock is 557 MHz with a boost of 1178 MHz, and it has a memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The M60’s FP32 throughput is 4.825 TFLOPS, with pixel rate of 75.39 GPixel/s and texture rate of 150.8 GTexel/s.

The W5500X uses the Navi 14 chip on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It contains 6,400 million transistors on a much smaller 158 mm² die, giving a density of 40.5M transistors per mm² — over three times denser than the M60. The W5500X has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its base clock is 1187 MHz with a boost of 1757 MHz, and memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). FP32 performance is 5.398 TFLOPS, and it also offers FP16 at 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which the M60 lacks entirely. The W5500X’s pixel rate is 56.22 GPixel/s (lower than the M60), but its texture rate is 168.7 GTexel/s (higher than the M60).

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and neither has ray tracing or tensor cores. The M60 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and requires a dual-slot form factor with a 1x 8-pin power connector. The W5500X uses the Apple MPX bus interface, has no power connectors listed, and is also dual-slot. The M60 has no display outputs; the W5500X has two HDMI 2.0b ports. The M60’s predecessor is Tesla Kepler and successor is Tesla Pascal, while the W5500X has no listed predecessor or successor. The M60 was released in 2015, and the W5500X in 2019.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear split decision. Choose the Tesla M60 if your priority is maximum raw compute score and cross-platform API support. Its average score of 30,490 is 9% higher than the W5500X’s 27,973, and it provides verified results in both OpenCL and Vulkan, making it a more versatile compute engine for heterogeneous workloads. The M60 also holds a higher percentile rank (75th vs 73rd) and is competitive with much newer consumer GPUs like the RTX 3070 Ti, which it leads by 1.8%. For headless server-side compute or rendering farms where display output is irrelevant, the M60 is the stronger performer.

Choose the Radeon Pro W5500X if efficiency, memory bandwidth, or display output matter more than raw compute scores. The W5500X delivers 11.9% higher FP32 throughput (5.398 vs 4.825 TFLOPS) at 125 W TDP versus 300 W, with a suggested PSU of 300 W versus 700 W. Its GDDR6 memory provides 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, a 39.7% improvement, which is critical for data-intensive tasks. The W5500X also supports FP16 at 10.80 TFLOPS, a feature absent on the M60, and includes two HDMI 2.0b outputs for direct display. Its 7 nm process and compact 158 mm² die represent a modern design, whereas the M60 is a 28 nm part.

The verdict hinges on workload context. For a compute-heavy, power-tolerant, display-free environment, the M60 wins. For an efficient, memory-fast, display-capable workstation, the W5500X wins. Neither card dominates the other; they serve different use cases.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M60 has a higher average score of 30,490, compared to 27,973 for the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X, a difference of 9%.

Q: Does the W5500X outperform the M60 in any compute metric?

A: Yes, the W5500X has a higher FP32 throughput of 5.398 TFLOPS versus 4.825 TFLOPS, and it also offers FP16 performance of 10.80 TFLOPS, which the M60 does not list.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The W5500X provides 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth from GDDR6, which is 39.7% higher than the M60’s 160.4 GB/s from GDDR5.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The M60 has a 300 W TDP and a 700 W suggested PSU, while the W5500X has a 125 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Q: Can either card connect to a display?

A: The W5500X has 2x HDMI 2.0b outputs, while the M60 has no display outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M60 | AMD Radeon Pro W5500X |

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

| Chip | GM204 | Navi 14 |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 557 MHz | 1187 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1757 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.4 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 128 | 96 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 75.39 GPixel/s | 56.22 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 150.8 GTexel/s | 168.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.825 TFLOPS | 5.398 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None listed | 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 125 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None listed |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 2x HDMI 2.0b |

| Release Date | 2015-08-29 | 2019-12-10 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 599 USD |