AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison
AMD Radeon RX 550
Tesla K20c
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c
The NVIDIA Tesla K20c and AMD Radeon RX 550 occupy very different positions in the hardware landscape, despite their similar overall benchmark percentiles. The Tesla K20c sits at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 550 sits at the 50th, making them statistical neighbors in aggregate performance. However, the data shows that this similarity masks fundamentally different strengths. In the only directly comparable benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Tesla K20c scores 11479 against the RX 550’s 11063, a 3.8% advantage. The RX 550 counters with results in other API tests—Geekbench Metal at 20838 and Geekbench Vulkan at 12270—that the Tesla cannot match because it has no display outputs and is not designed for those workloads. The Tesla is a compute-oriented accelerator from 2012, while the RX 550 is a 2017 entry-level graphics card with modern API support and a much lower power envelope.
Where Each One Wins
The data splits cleanly along workload type. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c wins in raw OpenCL compute throughput, posting a score of 11479 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 3.8% higher than the RX 550’s 11063. This advantage comes from its massive compute configuration: 2496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 40 render output units, paired with a 320-bit memory bus delivering 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. For floating-point calculations, the Tesla delivers 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, nearly three times the RX 550’s 1,211.4 GFLOPS. This makes it the clear choice for GPU-accelerated compute tasks that rely on OpenCL and raw FP32 performance.
The AMD Radeon RX 550 wins in every other measurable category. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 12270 demonstrates robust support for modern graphics APIs, a category where the Tesla K20c has no data and no display outputs to utilize. The RX 550 also posts a Geekbench Metal score of 20838, though this is an Apple-specific API that the Tesla cannot run. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RX 550 scores 127, again a test the Tesla cannot participate in due to its lack of display outputs and older DirectX support (12 with 11_0 feature level). The RX 550 also wins decisively on efficiency and physical footprint: it draws 50 W with no power connectors, while the Tesla requires 225 W and both a 6-pin and 8-pin connector.
FAQ
Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?
A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20c has an average benchmark score of 11479, while the AMD Radeon RX 550 has an average of 11075. The Tesla leads by 404 points, a difference of 3.6%.
Q: How does the Tesla K20c compare to its nearest rivals?
A: The Tesla K20c is slightly behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11528, delta -0.4%) and the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11627, delta -1.3%), but ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (11261, delta 1.9%). Its closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11680, delta -1.7%).
Q: What is the RX 550’s position relative to its nearest rivals?
A: The RX 550 is nearly tied with the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q (11088, delta -0.1%) and matches the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (11047, delta 0.3%). It trails the AMD FirePro W4300 (11225, delta -1.3%).
Q: Can the Tesla K20c run modern graphics API workloads?
A: The data shows the Tesla K20c supports DirectX 12 (with a feature level of 11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, but it has no display outputs. The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (feature level 12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, with outputs for DVI, HDMI 2.0b, and DisplayPort 1.4a.
Q: What is the memory configuration difference?
A: The Tesla K20c has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, yielding 208.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 550 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.
Q: What are the power requirements for each card?
A: The Tesla K20c has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W power supply, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector. The RX 550 has a TDP of 50 W and a suggested 250 W power supply, requiring no power connectors.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The only direct head-to-head benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisive in favor of the NVIDIA Tesla K20c. The Tesla scores 11479 against the RX 550’s 11063, a delta of 3.8%. This advantage aligns with the Tesla’s compute-oriented specifications. The Tesla’s 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the RX 550’s 1,211.4 GFLOPS, and its texture rate of 146.8 GTexel/s is nearly four times the RX 550’s 37.86 GTexel/s. The Tesla also has a higher pixel rate at 36.71 GPixel/s versus 18.93 GPixel/s.
However, the head-to-head picture changes when considering other benchmarks available for the RX 550. While the Tesla has no data for Vulkan, Metal, or DirectX 12, the RX 550 posts scores of 12270 in Geekbench Vulkan and 20838 in Geekbench Metal. These are workloads the Tesla cannot even attempt due to its lack of display outputs. The RX 550’s 127 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 further illustrates its capability in modern gaming-oriented workloads, where the Tesla’s 2012-era architecture and limited DirectX 12 feature level (11_0) would be a severe constraint.
The broader context of rival scores reinforces the head-to-head result. The Tesla’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, scores 11528, which is only 0.4% higher than the Tesla. The RX 550’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q, scores 11088, just 0.1% above the RX 550. These tight deltas suggest that both cards are positioned at the edge of their respective performance tiers, but the Tesla’s OpenCL lead is consistent with its larger compute footprint.
Specification Differences
The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The Tesla K20c uses a 28 nm process node from TSMC, with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The RX 550 uses a 14 nm node from GlobalFoundries, with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, yielding a higher density of 21.4 million per mm². The Tesla’s chip is the GK110, while the RX 550 uses the Lexa chip.
Memory is another major divergence. The Tesla has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus with 208.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The RX 550 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The Tesla’s shading unit count is 2496, versus 512 for the RX 550. Texture mapping units are 208 versus 32, and ROPs are 40 versus 16.
Power and physical requirements differ dramatically. The Tesla has a 225 W TDP, requires a 550 W power supply, and needs one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector. The RX 550 has a 50 W TDP, requires a 250 W power supply, and needs no power connectors. The Tesla is 267 mm long (10.5 inches) and dual-slot, while the RX 550 is 145 mm long (5.7 inches) and also dual-slot. The Tesla uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while the RX 550 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The Tesla has no display outputs, while the RX 550 offers one DVI, one HDMI 2.0b, and one DisplayPort 1.4a output.
Architecture Differences
The architecture gap is generational and functional. The Tesla K20c is built on NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture, part of the Tesla Kepler (Kxx) generation, with a GK110 chip. The RX 550 is built on AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation, with a Lexa chip. The Tesla’s predecessor is Tesla Fermi and its successor is Tesla Maxwell. The RX 550’s predecessor is Arctic Islands and its successor is Vega.
The process technology differs, with the Tesla at 28 nm from TSMC and the RX 550 at 14 nm from GlobalFoundries. This explains the transistor density difference: the RX 550 packs 21.4 million transistors per mm² versus the Tesla’s 12.6 million per mm², despite having far fewer total transistors (2,200 million versus 7,080 million). The Tesla compensates with a larger die and more compute units.
API support reveals the architectural age gap. The Tesla supports DirectX 12 with a feature level of 11_0, while the RX 550 supports DirectX 12 with a feature level of 12_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 550 supports Vulkan 1.3 versus the Tesla’s Vulkan 1.2.175. The RX 550 also supports FP16 computation at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (1,211.4 GFLOPS), while the Tesla has no FP16 data in the pack. The Tesla’s lack of display outputs is a structural feature, not an omission, as it is designed for compute-only deployments.
The Verdict
The data dictates a clear split verdict. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c is the choice for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads where raw FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth matter. Its 3.524 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 208.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 5 GB memory capacity are substantial advantages. Its 3.8% OpenCL lead over the RX 550, combined with its 51st percentile ranking and proximity to rivals like the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11528, delta -0.4%), shows it remains competitive in its niche. However, it requires a 550 W power supply, dual-slot space, and external power connectors, and it offers no display outputs, limiting its use to servers or compute clusters.
The AMD Radeon RX 550 is the choice for desktop systems requiring a low-power, low-profile GPU with modern display outputs and API support. Its 50 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it far easier to integrate into existing systems. Its Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) support, along with its 12270 Vulkan score and 20838 Metal score, demonstrate capability in contemporary graphics workloads that the Tesla cannot handle. Its 5.7-inch length makes it suitable for small form factor builds. The RX 550’s 50th percentile ranking and near-tie with the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q (11088, delta -0.1%) indicate it holds its own in its performance class.
For users who need compute acceleration without display output, the Tesla K20c is the data-supported pick. For users who need a functional graphics card for everyday use, light gaming, or multi-monitor setups, the RX 550 is the only viable option between the two, and its modern API support gives it a longer software lifespan. The Tesla’s 2012 release date and the RX 550’s 2017 release date further underscore that the RX 550 is the more contemporary product, even if the Tesla retains a compute performance edge. Both are end-of-life products, but they serve mutually exclusive use cases.