AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M10 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 are both end-of-life workstation cards, but they target entirely different problems. The Tesla M10, based on the older Maxwell architecture, is a compute-focused accelerator with no display outputs, while the Radeon Pro WX 5100 is a modern Polaris-based card built for traditional workstation use with four DisplayPort outputs. Benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between them, with the AMD card leading in every shared test.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 dominates in raw compute. It delivers 3.892 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA Tesla M10 offers 1.672 TFLOPS. This is a fundamental difference in their design targets: the Tesla M10's low FP32 output is offset by its intended role as a virtualized GPU for cloud workloads, whereas the WX 5100 is a conventional workstation card.

Q: How do their benchmark scores compare in OpenCL?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 24,217 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the Tesla M10's 10,318. That represents a 57.4% deficit for the NVIDIA card in this head-to-head test. The data consistently shows the AMD card outperforming in both compute and graphics workloads.

Q: Are these cards suitable for gaming?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 5100 has DirectX 12 (12_0) support, while the Tesla M10 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). However, neither card is designed for gaming. The Tesla M10 has no display outputs at all, making it unusable for gaming. The WX 5100 is a professional card, though its PassMark DirectX 9 score of 88 and DirectX 11 score of 36 suggest it is not optimized for that purpose.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Tesla M10 is a power-hungry dual-slot card with a 225 W TDP and requires a 550 W power supply and one 8-pin connector. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 is far more efficient, with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested power supply of only 250 W. This makes the AMD card dramatically easier to integrate into existing systems.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon Pro WX 5100 has nearly double the memory bandwidth of the Tesla M10. The AMD card features a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA card uses a 128-bit bus with only 83.20 GB/s. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the WX 5100 can feed its compute units far more effectively.

Q: Is the Tesla M10 still relevant for any use case?

A: The Tesla M10's 47th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it above the WX 5100's 44th percentile, despite losing the head-to-head benchmarks. Its only benchmark scores are Geekbench OpenCL at 10,318 and Vulkan at 9,130. Given its lack of display outputs and end-of-life status, its relevance is limited to legacy virtualized environments where its specific Maxwell architecture was originally deployed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark. The NVIDIA Tesla M10 uses the GM107 chip built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 1,870 million transistors packed into a 148 mm² die. This works out to a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 uses the Ellesmere chip fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, achieving 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter.

The core configurations differ massively. The Tesla M10 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the AMD card has nearly three times the shader count and seven times the texture units. The clock speeds tell a different story: the Tesla M10 runs at a base of 1033 MHz and boosts to 1306 MHz, while the WX 5100 runs at a low 713 MHz base but boosts to 1086 MHz. Despite lower clocks, the AMD card's massive shader advantage produces far higher throughput.

Memory subsystems also diverge. The Tesla M10 uses a 128-bit bus with 5.2 Gbps effective memory speed, yielding 83.20 GB/s. The WX 5100 uses a 256-bit bus with 5 Gbps effective speed, giving it 160.0 GB/s. Both have 8 GB of GDDR5, but the AMD card's wider bus doubles the available bandwidth. In terms of APIs, the Tesla M10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the WX 5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD card also adds FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 3.892 TFLOPS, while the Tesla M10 lists no FP16 capability.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for most buyers. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the superior card in every measurable head-to-head benchmark, winning both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests. It offers more modern architecture, better efficiency, higher memory bandwidth, and display outputs. The Tesla M10's only advantage is its slightly higher percentile ranking at 47 versus 44, but this does not translate to any benchmark victory against the WX 5100.

Pick the Radeon Pro WX 5100 if you need a workstation card that can actually drive displays, require modern DirectX 12 (12_0) support, or want to minimize power consumption. Its 75 W TDP and single-slot design make it far easier to install. Pick the Tesla M10 only if you are working in a legacy virtualized infrastructure that specifically requires NVIDIA Maxwell-based accelerators with no display output, and you can tolerate its 225 W power draw and dual-slot footprint. For any conventional workload, the WX 5100 is the clear winner based on the benchmark data.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The manufacturing process differs: the Tesla M10 uses 28 nm at TSMC, while the WX 5100 uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries. The Tesla M10 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, while the WX 5100 has 5,700 million on 232 mm². Transistor density also differs, 12.6 million per mm² versus 24.6 million per mm².

Clock speeds vary significantly. The Tesla M10 runs at 1033 MHz base and 1306 MHz boost, while the WX 5100 runs at 713 MHz base and 1086 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card and 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the AMD card. Memory bus width doubles from 128-bit on the Tesla to 256-bit on the WX 5100, and bandwidth increases from 83.20 GB/s to 160.0 GB/s.

Compute resources differ dramatically: 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the Tesla M10 versus 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the WX 5100. Pixel rate is 20.90 GPixel/s versus 34.75 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 52.24 GTexel/s versus 121.6 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.672 TFLOPS versus 3.892 TFLOPS, with the AMD card adding FP16 at 3.892 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs also diverge. The Tesla M10 has a 225 W TDP, dual-slot width, and requires a 1x 8-pin connector and 550 W power supply. The WX 5100 has a 75 W TDP, single-slot width, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The Tesla M10 is 267 mm long with no display outputs, while the WX 5100 is 173 mm long and 112 mm tall with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Release dates differ by six months, with the Tesla launching in May 2016 and the WX 5100 in November 2016.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The shared benchmark suite between these cards consists of two Geekbench tests, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the WX 5100 scores 24,217 against the Tesla M10's 10,318. The delta percentage is -57.4%, meaning the Tesla M10 scores 57.4% lower than the AMD card. This is a massive gap that reflects the fundamental compute advantage of the GCN 4.0 architecture with its 1,792 shaders.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the results are even more lopsided. The WX 5100 scores 26,909 while the Tesla M10 scores 9,130. The delta percentage is -66.1%, indicating the NVIDIA card trails by more than two-thirds. The Vulkan test highlights the modern driver and architecture advantages of the AMD card, which supports Vulkan 1.3 compared to the Tesla M10's Vulkan 1.4. Interestingly, the Tesla M10 supports a higher Vulkan version but still loses badly in actual performance.

The wins tally confirms this dominance: AMD takes 2 wins out of 2 head-to-head tests, while NVIDIA takes 0. The average benchmark scores reinforce the picture: the WX 5100 has a wider benchmark portfolio including PassMark tests, with a Geekbench Metal score of 29,003 and a PassMark G3D score of 5,496. The Tesla M10's average benchmark score of 9,724 is actually higher than the WX 5100's 8,863, but this is because the averages are calculated across different test sets. The direct comparisons provide the most reliable evidence of relative performance.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins in all compute-heavy benchmarks, including Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan. It also wins in practical workstation scenarios due to its display outputs, which allow it to function as a standard graphics card. Its memory bandwidth advantage of 160.0 GB/s versus 83.20 GB/s makes it better suited for large data sets and texture-heavy workloads. The card's FP16 support at 3.892 TFLOPS gives it additional flexibility for mixed-precision compute tasks that the Tesla M10 cannot handle.

The NVIDIA Tesla M10 wins in the narrow category of legacy virtualized deployments. Its Maxwell architecture was designed for GPU virtualization, and its lack of display outputs confirms this specialization. For organizations with existing Tesla Maxwell infrastructure, the M10 may be the only compatible replacement. It also has a slight edge in API version support for Vulkan, at 1.4 versus the WX 5100's 1.3, though this does not translate to better performance in the benchmark data.

For power-conscious builds, the WX 5100 is the clear winner with its 75 W TDP and no external power requirement. The Tesla M10's 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU make it a much harder component to accommodate. Physical size also favors the AMD card, which is single-slot and 173 mm long compared to the dual-slot, 267 mm Tesla. Ultimately, the Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the better card for virtually every real-world use case, with the Tesla M10 relegated to a very specific niche in the data center.