AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT records an average benchmark score of 14,692, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm scores 12,625. The RX 5500 XT sits in the 57th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the Tesla K20Xm's 52nd percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the shared benchmark tests?

A: In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5500 XT scores 54,842 versus 8,035 for the Tesla K20Xm, a 582.5% advantage. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5500 XT scores 46,965 versus 17,215, a 172.8% lead. The RX 5500 XT wins both head-to-head tests.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has 2,688 shading units, while the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT has 1,408. Despite having nearly double the shading units, the Tesla K20Xm delivers lower FP32 performance at 3.935 TFLOPS versus 5.196 TFLOPS for the RX 5500 XT.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The RX 5500 XT features 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla K20Xm features 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 249.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has the smaller manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm uses a 28 nm process at the same foundry. The RX 5500 XT has a transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter versus 12.6 million for the Tesla K20Xm.

Q: Do both cards support modern graphics APIs?

A: The RX 5500 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla K20Xm supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT and NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm come from entirely different design eras and philosophies. The RX 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, part of the Navi (RX 5000) generation. The Tesla K20Xm uses the GK110 chip with Kepler architecture, part of the Tesla Kepler (Kxx) generation.

The manufacturing process separates these GPUs by a full technology generation. The RX 5500 XT is fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the Tesla K20Xm uses a 28 nm process at the same foundry. This translates to a dramatic difference in transistor density: the RX 5500 XT packs 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter, versus 12.6 million for the Tesla K20Xm. The RX 5500 XT contains 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, while the Tesla K20Xm contains 7,080 million transistors on a much larger 561 mm² die.

The shading unit counts differ significantly. The Tesla K20Xm carries 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The RX 5500 XT carries 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite the Tesla's hardware advantage in raw unit counts, clock speeds flip the performance equation. The RX 5500 XT operates at a base clock of 1607 MHz, a game clock of 1717 MHz, and a boost clock of 1845 MHz, while the Tesla K20Xm has no listed base, boost, or game clock in the database.

Memory architecture follows different priorities. The RX 5500 XT uses 4 GB of GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective on a 128-bit bus for 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla K20Xm uses 6 GB of GDDR5 at 5.2 Gbps effective on a 384-bit bus for 249.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla's wider bus yields higher total bandwidth despite slower memory.

Compute and rendering features also diverge. The RX 5500 XT supports FP16 at 10.39 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the Tesla K20Xm has no FP16 data recorded. The RX 5500 XT delivers 5.196 TFLOPS FP32, while the Tesla K20Xm delivers 3.935 TFLOPS. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores.

The Tesla K20Xm has no display outputs, reflecting its compute-focused product positioning. The RX 5500 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RX 5500 XT uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Tesla K20Xm uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT in the shared tests, but the strengths of each card are very different in context.

The RX 5500 XT wins in all recorded compute workloads in this comparison. Its Geekbench Metal score of 58,842 versus the Tesla K20Xm's 6,035 shows a massive advantage in Apple's Metal API. A 582.5% delta is not an incremental gain, it is a full generational leap. The OpenCL test shows a similar story, with the RX 5500 XT leading by 172.8%. The RX 5500 XT also has 11 benchmark results recorded in the database, including multiple Passmark tests, while the Tesla K20Xm has only two.

The Tesla K20Xm's advantages are structural rather than benchmark-based. It has more memory capacity at 6 GB versus 4 GB, and higher memory bandwidth at 249.6 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. Its 384-bit memory bus is three times wider than the RX 5500 XT's 128-bit bus. For workloads that depend heavily on memory capacity and bus width, the Tesla K20Xm offers a more robust infrastructure.

The Tesla K20Xm also has a higher shading unit count at 2,688 versus 1,408, which could translate to computing advantages in specific parallel workloads that are not represented in the available benchmark results. However, the recorded data shows that the RX 5500 XT's higher clock speeds and newer architecture overcome this unit-count deficit in every measured test.

The RX 5500 XT consumes 130 W TDP versus 235 W for the Tesla K20Xm, and it requires a 300 W PSU versus 550 W. This power efficiency is a functional advantage for any build where thermal or power constraints matter.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT and NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm differ in nearly every core specification.

• Process node: 7 nm (RX 5500 XT) versus 28 nm (Tesla K20Xm)
• Transistors: 6,400 million versus 7,080 million
• Die size: 158 mm² versus 561 mm²
• Transistor density: 40.5M / mm² versus 12.6M / mm²
• Base clock: 1607 MHz versus no listed base clock
• Boost clock: 1845 MHz versus no listed boost clock
• Game clock: 1717 MHz versus no listed game clock
• Memory clock: 14 GHz effective versus 5.2 Ghz effective
• Memory size: 4 GB versus 6 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Bus width: 128 bit versus 384 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 249.6 GB/s
• Shading units: 1,408 versus 2,688
• TMUs: 88 versus 224
• ROPs: 32 versus 48
• FP32: 5.196 TFLOPS versus 3.935 TFLOPS
• FP16: 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1) versus no FP16 data
• TDP: 130 W versus 235 W
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 550 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus no outputs
• Length: 180 mm (7.1 inches) versus 267 mm (10.5 inches)
• Release date: 2019-12-11 versus 2012-11-11
• Launch MSRP: 169 USD versus 7,699 USD (stated once, for the record)
• API support: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 (11_0), Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.2.175

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmark tests between the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT and the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm. The RX 5500 XT wins both, and the margins are extreme.

In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5500 XT scores 58,842 against the Tesla K20Xm's 8,035. This is a delta of 585.5%, meaning the RX 5500 XT is nearly seven times faster in this test. Metal is Apple's GPU framework, which favors the RDNA architecture's compute capabilities and driver optimization for Apple platforms.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5500 XT scores 46,965 against the Tesla K20Xm's 17,215. This is a 172.8% advantage, or roughly 2.7 times faster. OpenCL is a more general-purpose compute workload, but the RX 5500 XT's newer architecture and higher clock speeds dominate.

The Tesla K20Xm does not win any of the recorded tests. Its strengths lie in its memory system, with 6 GB capacity and 249.6 GB/s bandwidth, but these do not translate into benchmark wins in the available data.

The RX 5500 XT's average benchmark score of 14,692 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14,747, delta -0.4%) and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14,532, delta 1.1%). The Tesla K20Xm's average of 12,625 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT (12,710, delta -0.7%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773, delta -1.2%).

The average score gap between the two cards is 2,067 points, with the RX 5500 XT ahead by 16.4% based on their avgBenchmarkScore values.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT outperforms the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm in every recorded benchmark, with win counts of 2 to 0 in the head-to-head tests. The RX 5500 XT leads by 582.5% in Geekbench Metal and 172.8% in Geekbench OpenCL. Its average benchmark score is higher (14,692 versus 12,625), and its 57th percentile ranking versus 52nd confirms a consistent overall performance advantage.

Architecture and manufacturing give the RX 5500 XT its edge. The 7 nm RDNA 1.0 design with a 1845 MHz boost clock delivers 5.196 TFLOPS FP32 from just 1,408 shading units. The 28 nm Kepler design with 2,688 shading units must operate at lower clocks to yield only 3.935 TFLOPS. The result is a clear efficiency and performance win for the AMD card.

The Tesla K20Xm retains specific advantages: more memory capacity (6 GB vs 4 GB), higher bandwidth (249.6 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s), and a wider memory bus (384 bit vs 128 bit). For compute workloads that are memory-bound and demand large working sets, the Tesla K20Xm could be the more suitable hardware. But the measured benchmark results do not reflect that.

The RX 5500 XT also offers better power characteristics at 130 W versus 235 W, a smaller physical footprint at 180 mm versus 267 mm, and display outputs that the Tesla K20Xm completely lacks. The RX 5500 XT is a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin power connector, while the Tesla K20Xm has no listed power connectors and requires a 550 W PSU.

For general use, compute, gaming, or any workload measured in the database, the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the clear pick. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is a legacy compute card that was designed for a different era and a different purpose. The data shows the RX 5500 XT as the better GPU by a wide margin, and the only scenario where the Tesla K20Xm makes sense is if a workload specifically requires its larger memory bus and higher memory capacity.