AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20m Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data splits these two workstation cards cleanly by era and workload. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 decisively wins both head-to-head tests, delivering a Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,213 against the NVIDIA Tesla K20m's 16,241, a 72.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the W7500 scores 68,634 versus 21,936, a 68% lead. The Tesla K20m, an end-of-life product from the Kepler generation, retains a higher aggregate percentile placement at 64 compared to the W7500's 59, but that reflects the broader GPU database rather than direct comparison. The W7500 is the clear pick for anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads today, while the K20m offers no benchmark win in any recorded test. For professional users prioritizing modern API support, lower power draw, and current driver features, the AMD card is the only defensible choice from this data.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent a generational gulf in design philosophy. The NVIDIA Tesla K20m uses the GK110 chip built on TSMC's 28 nm process, containing 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. It belongs to the Tesla Kepler series, with a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) and a 320-bit GDDR5 interface. Its 5 GB frame buffer delivers 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The chip packs 2,496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 40 raster operation units. It has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, as those did not exist in the Kepler architecture. The K20m supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. It draws 225 W, requires a dual-slot cooler with 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors, and a 550 W suggested power supply. It has no display outputs. The card measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process, packing 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, a density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. That density advantage is stark: roughly five times the transistors per area versus the K20m. The W7500 runs at a 1500 MHz base clock and 1700 MHz boost, with 2000 MHz memory (16 Gbps effective) over a 128-bit GDDR6 bus, producing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The FP32 throughput is 12.19 TFLOPS, more than triple the K20m's 3.524 TFLOPS. It also supports FP16 at 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1), which the K20m does not list. The W7500 is a single-slot card drawing just 70 W, with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. It offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The card measures 216 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. It is an active product, successor to the Radeon Pro Vega line.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two common benchmark tests exist in the database for both cards, and the AMD card wins both by wide margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the W7500 scores 58,213 compared to the K20m's 16,241. That is a 72.1% difference in favor of the AMD card. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap is similar: 68,634 for the W7500 versus 21,936 for the K20m, a 68% lead. The K20m has zero wins across the recorded head-to-head set.

These results align with the compute specifications. The W7500's FP32 throughput of 12.19 TFLOPS dwarfs the K20m's 3.524 TFLOPS, and the W7500's memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s exceeds the K20m's 208.0 GB/s. The Vulkan score gap reflects the API maturity difference: the K20m supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the W7500 supports Vulkan 1.4. The OpenCL result similarly favors the newer architecture's driver optimization and raw throughput.

The individual benchmark portfolios also differ. The K20m only has two recorded Geekbench scores, averaging 19,089. Its nearest rivals by average score include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 19,049 (0.2% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 19,036 (0.3%), and the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 19,030 (0.3%). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 sits slightly higher at 19,164, a -0.4% delta relative to the K20m. The K20m's 64th percentile placement indicates it sits above the median of all GPUs in the database.

The W7500's average benchmark score across nine tests is 16,415, but that includes several low-scoring PassMark DirectX tests that drag the average down. Its nearest rivals by average score are the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at 16,408 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT at 16,361 (0.3%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at 16,351 (0.4%). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 sits slightly higher at 16,504, a -0.5% delta. The W7500's 59th percentile placement is below the K20m's, but that ranking includes consumer gaming cards, where the W7500's professional focus yields different trade-offs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32, versus the NVIDIA Tesla K20m's 3.524 TFLOPS. The W7500 also lists FP16 at 24.37 TFLOPS, which the K20m does not provide.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The K20m has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, providing 208.0 GB/s. The W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the W7500's higher effective memory speed yields 48 GB/s more bandwidth.

Q: Are there any tests where the Tesla K20m wins?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD card wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The K20m records zero wins across the two-test set.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The K20m is rated at 225 W with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, plus a 550 W suggested PSU. The W7500 is rated at 70 W, requires no power connectors, and only needs a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The K20m supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The W7500 also has 28 ray tracing cores, which the K20m lacks.

Q: How do the two cards rank in the overall database?

A: The K20m sits at the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the W7500 sits at the 59th. The K20m's average score is 19,089, and the W7500's average is 16,415, though the W7500's average includes PassMark DirectX tests that score in the double digits.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 wins in every measurable category within this database. In compute benchmarks, it is dominant: the OpenCL score of 58,213 versus 16,241 and the Vulkan score of 68,634 versus 21,936 are not close. Its FP32 throughput of 12.19 TFLOPS and FP16 capability make it suitable for modern compute workloads, machine learning inference, and content creation tasks that leverage ray tracing. The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is larger and faster than the K20m's 5 GB GDDR5 with 208.0 GB/s. The W7500 also supports DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, making it a viable option for multi-monitor professional setups, while the K20m has no display outputs at all.

The W7500's power efficiency is a clear operational advantage. At 70 W with no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, it slots into systems that would struggle with the K20m's 225 W draw and 550 W PSU requirement. The single-slot design versus dual-slot also matters for density in workstation builds. The W7500's modern API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, means it can handle current software stacks without compatibility workarounds.

The NVIDIA Tesla K20m does not win any recorded head-to-head benchmark. Its only advantages are circumstantial. It has a higher database percentile at 64 versus 59, which reflects its position against all GPUs, not against the W7500 specifically. Its 320-bit memory bus and 208 TMUs are higher raw counts, but the W7500's 64 ROPs and 112 TMUs produce higher pixel and texture rates: 108.8 GPixel/s and 190.4 GTexel/s versus 36.71 GPixel/s and 146.8 GTexel/s. The K20m's 5 GB capacity may still be sufficient for legacy workloads that cannot address more memory, but the data shows no performance scenario where it outperforms the W7500.

For users with existing Kepler-era software validation, the K20m remains a functional, end-of-life part. Its 2013 release date and 3,199 USD launch MSRP place it in a different market era. The W7500, launched in 2023 at 429 USD launch MSRP, is the active product with ongoing support. The benchmark evidence is unambiguous: the W7500 is the faster card in every test, the more efficient card by a wide margin, and the only one with modern display and ray tracing features. The K20m's place is in legacy systems, not new purchases.