AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The NVIDIA Tesla M10 scores 10,318 points, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8,851 points. That is a 16.6% advantage for the Tesla M10. This is not a marginal win; it is a clear generational leap in compute throughput. The Tesla M10 also registers a Vulkan score of 9,130, a test the Radeon R9 M265X does not appear in at all, which further underscores the NVIDIA card's broader API readiness.

Looking at the wider field, the Tesla M10's average benchmark score of 9,724 places it at the 47th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 at 9,780 (a 0.6% deficit for the Tesla), the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 at 9,716 (a 0.1% advantage), the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 at 9,665 (a 0.6% lead), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 at 9,653 (a 0.7% lead). These are all extremely close scores, meaning the Tesla M10 sits in a tight competitive cluster where small delta percentages separate it from much newer or much older hardware.

The Radeon R9 M265X, by contrast, has an average score of 8,851 and sits at the 44th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 at 8,863 (a 0.1% deficit), the AMD Radeon 550X at 8,918 (a 0.8% deficit), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile at 8,746 (a 1.2% advantage for the AMD), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 at 8,743 (also a 1.2% advantage). The Radeon's position is more isolated; it is not just slower than the Tesla, it is surrounded by a different tier of competitors entirely.

The head-to-head delta of 16.6% is the single most important number here. In raw OpenCL throughput, the Tesla M10 is roughly one-sixth faster than the Radeon R9 M265X. That gap is consistent with the architectural differences between the two, which we will explore next. For any workload that depends on general compute performance, the Tesla M10 wins outright.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Tesla M10 is built on the Maxwell architecture, using the GM107 chip, and belongs to the Tesla Maxwell generation. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Venus chip, part of the Gem System R9 M200 generation. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, so process technology is not a differentiator. The transistor counts, however, differ meaningfully: the Tesla M10 packs 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, while the Radeon R9 M265X has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The resulting transistor densities are close, 12.6M per mm² for NVIDIA and 12.2M per mm² for AMD, but the Tesla simply has more silicon to work with.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The Tesla M10 runs at a base clock of 1033 MHz with a boost clock of 1306 MHz. The Radeon R9 M265X is far more conservative, with a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost of only 625 MHz. That is nearly a double clock advantage for the Tesla at boost. Memory clocks also favor NVIDIA: the Tesla's memory runs at 1300 MHz, which translates to 5.2 Gbps effective, while the Radeon's memory runs at 1000 MHz, or 4 Gbps effective. The Tesla's memory bandwidth is 83.20 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s for the Radeon.

Both cards have 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The similarity ends there. The Tesla M10's pixel rate is 20.90 GPixel/s versus 10.00 GPixel/s for the Radeon, and its texture rate is 52.24 GTexel/s versus 25.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1.672 TFLOPS for the Tesla, exactly double the Radeon's 800.0 GFLOPS. This is a textbook case where identical shader counts produce wildly different real-world throughput because of clock speeds and architectural efficiency.

Memory capacity is another major split: the Tesla M10 ships with 8 GB of GDDR5, while the Radeon R9 M265X has only 2 GB. Both use a 128-bit bus. The Tesla also leads on API support. It supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, but only Vulkan 1.2.170. The Tesla's higher Vulkan version is notable, and its recorded Vulkan benchmark score of 9,130 confirms it is usable in modern Vulkan workloads. The Radeon has no Vulkan score recorded in the database.

The power envelope is not comparable directly because the Radeon's TDP is not listed. The Tesla M10 is a dual-slot card requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 550 W power supply. It is a full-length card at 267 mm, with no display outputs. The Radeon's dimensions, power connectors, and slot width are all unlisted, so it is likely a mobile or low-profile part, but the database does not confirm that.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M10 scores 10,318 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 8,851 for the AMD Radeon R9 M265X, a 16.6% advantage for the Tesla.

Q: Do these GPUs have the same number of shading units?

A: Yes, both have 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite this, the Tesla M10 achieves roughly double the FP32 throughput, 1.672 TFLOPS versus 800.0 GFLOPS, due to higher clocks and architectural efficiency.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Tesla M10 offers 83.20 GB/s from its 8 GB GDDR5 configuration, while the Radeon R9 M265X provides 64.00 GB/s from 2 GB GDDR5. Both use a 128-bit memory bus.

Q: Is the Radeon R9 M265X competitive with the Tesla M10 in any benchmark?

A: In the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon loses by 16.6%. The database records zero benchmark wins for the Radeon against the Tesla.

Q: What are the API differences between the two cards?

A: The Tesla M10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon R9 M265X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Tesla also has a recorded Vulkan score of 9,130, while the Radeon has none.

Q: Which card is better for a modern system build?

A: The Tesla M10's newer architecture, higher clocks, double the memory, and superior Vulkan support make it the stronger option. The Radeon R9 M265X is end-of-life and was released in 2014, two years before the Tesla M10's 2016 release.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the NVIDIA Tesla M10 and the AMD Radeon R9 M265X:

• Chip: GM107 (NVIDIA) vs Venus (AMD)
• Architecture: Maxwell vs GCN 1.0
• Generation: Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) vs Gem System (R9 M200)
• Transistors: 1,870 million vs 1,500 million
• Die Size: 148 mm² vs 123 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.6M / mm² vs 12.2M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1033 MHz vs 575 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1306 MHz vs 625 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) vs 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 8 GB vs 2 GB
• Memory Bandwidth: 83.20 GB/s vs 64.00 GB/s
• Pixel Rate: 20.90 GPixel/s vs 10.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 52.24 GTexel/s vs 25.00 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1.672 TFLOPS vs 800.0 GFLOPS
• TDP: 225 W vs not listed
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs not listed
• Power Connectors: 1x 8-pin vs not listed
• Suggested PSU: 550 W vs not listed
• Display Outputs: No outputs vs not listed
• DirectX: 12 (11_0) vs 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2.170
• Dimensions: 267 mm (10.5 inches) vs not listed
• Release Date: 2016-05-17 vs 2014-03-20
• Predecessor: Tesla Kepler vs Solar System
• Successor: Tesla Pascal vs Polaris Mobile
• OpenCL Benchmark: 10,318 vs 8,851
• Vulkan Benchmark: 9,130 vs not listed
• Average Benchmark Score: 9,724 vs 8,851
• Percentile vs All GPUs: 47th vs 44th

Fields that are identical include the process node (28 nm), foundry (TSMC), shading units (640), TMUs (40), ROPs (16), memory type (GDDR5), memory bus width (128 bit), bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x16), and OpenGL version (4.6).

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Tesla M10 beats the AMD Radeon R9 M265X in every measurable category where both have data. The OpenCL score is 16.6% higher, the FP32 throughput is exactly double, the memory bandwidth is 30% higher, and the memory capacity is four times larger. The Radeon has zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

The Tesla M10 also occupies a stronger position relative to the broader GPU market. Its 47th percentile ranking places it alongside modern midrange cards like the GeForce GTX 1070 and Quadro P4000, with delta percentages under 1% in either direction. The Radeon's 44th percentile puts it near older or lower-tier parts like the Radeon 550X and the GeForce GTX 460 v2. These are different performance classes, and the benchmark scores reflect that.

The release dates reinforce the gap. The Radeon R9 M265X launched on 2014-03-20, while the Tesla M10 launched on 2016-05-17. Two years of architectural evolution matter, and the numbers show it. The Radeon is also end-of-life, as is the Tesla, but the Tesla's successor, Tesla Pascal, and its predecessor, Tesla Kepler, show a clear lineage of high-performance compute parts. The Radeon's lineage, from Solar System to Polaris Mobile, indicates a mobile-oriented product line.

For anyone choosing between these two, the Tesla M10 is the only rational pick. It is faster, has more memory, supports newer APIs, and posts a Vulkan score that the Radeon cannot match. The only caveat is power: the Tesla requires a 550 W power supply and an 8-pin connector, while the Radeon's power requirements are unknown. If the system can supply the power, the Tesla is the superior part.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Tesla M10 wins in:

• OpenCL compute performance: 10,318 versus 8,851, a 16.6% lead.
• FP32 throughput: 1.672 TFLOPS versus 800.0 GFLOPS, a 100% advantage.
• Pixel fill rate: 20.90 GPixel/s versus 10.00 GPixel/s.
• Texture fill rate: 52.24 GTexel/s versus 25.00 GTexel/s.
• Memory bandwidth: 83.20 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s.
• Memory capacity: 8 GB versus 2 GB.
• Vulkan support: version 1.4 and a recorded score of 9,130 versus version 1.2.170 with no recorded score.
• Clock speeds: 1033 MHz base and 1306 MHz boost versus 575 MHz base and 625 MHz boost.
• Transistor count and die size: 1,870 million transistors on 148 mm² versus 1,500 million on 123 mm².
• Market percentile: 47th versus 44th.

AMD Radeon R9 M265X wins in:

• DirectX version support: 12 (11_1) versus 12 (11_0). This is a minor edge, as both support DirectX 12, but the Radeon's feature level is one notch higher.
• Transistor density: 12.2M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm². This is not a performance win; it simply means the Radeon packs slightly fewer transistors per square millimeter.
• Power requirements: the Radeon's TDP is not listed, so it may draw less power than the Tesla's 225 W, but the database does not confirm this. If power consumption is a concern, the Radeon's unknown status is not an advantage, merely an absence of data.

The Radeon has no benchmark wins. Its only listed score, OpenCL at 8,851, is lower than the Tesla's OpenCL and Vulkan scores. The database records zero wins for the Radeon in the head-to-head comparison. For any compute-oriented task, the Tesla M10 is the correct choice. For a system with strict power or space constraints, the Radeon's smaller footprint might be preferable, but the data does not provide enough information to recommend it over the Tesla on those grounds alone.