AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla M4 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M4 and the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT represent two very different approaches to GPU design, separated by a four-year gap in release dates and a fundamental shift in process technology. The recorded data shows that the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the clear performance leader in the single common benchmark available, but the Tesla M4 offers a distinct set of characteristics that may appeal to specific use cases. This analysis explores the head-to-head results, architectural differences, and the implications for potential users.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one directly comparable benchmark result between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT scores 46965, while the NVIDIA Tesla M4 scores 16932. This represents a delta of -63.9% for the Tesla M4 relative to the AMD card, meaning the RX 5500 XT is approximately 2.77 times faster in raw OpenCL compute performance.

This is the only head-to-head test recorded, and the AMD card wins it decisively. The scale of this victory is significant. The Tesla M4's score of 16932 places it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RX 5500 XT's score of 46965 on the OpenCL test is substantially higher than its own average benchmark score of 14692 across all tests, indicating that OpenCL is a strong workload for this AMD architecture.

Looking at the rival positioning, the Tesla M4's average benchmark score of 16932 places it in the company of the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17019, -0.5%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037, -0.6%). It is slightly ahead of the NVIDIA T400 4 GB (16792, 0.8%) and slightly behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17083, -0.9%). This clustering suggests the Tesla M4's compute capabilities are roughly comparable to a high-end GPU from the Kepler generation or a modern entry-level professional card.

The RX 5500 XT, with an average benchmark score of 14692, sits alongside the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14747, -0.4%) and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14532, 1.1%). It is also ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M (14404, 2%) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14385, 2.1%). The interesting observation here is that the RX 5500 XT's average score across all its benchmarks is lower than its OpenCL score alone, suggesting that its performance profile varies considerably depending on the workload.

The single head-to-head result is unambiguous: in OpenCL compute, the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is vastly superior to the NVIDIA Tesla M4. The delta of -63.9% is among the largest margins one could expect to see in this database. This means that for any workload that relies heavily on OpenCL compute, the RX 5500 XT is the obvious choice based on the recorded measurements.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The NVIDIA Tesla M4 is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, using the GM206 chip, while the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT employs the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 14 chip. These are fundamentally different designs from different eras.

The process technology tells a clear story of generational progress. The Tesla M4 is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 5500 XT uses a 7 nm process, also from TSMC. This process node difference is dramatic. The Tesla M4 packs 2,940 million transistors into a die size of 228 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.9 million transistors per mm². The RX 5500 XT, by contrast, packs 6,400 million transistors into a smaller die of 158 mm², achieving a transistor density of 40.5 million transistors per mm². This means the AMD card has more than double the transistor count in a die that is about 31% smaller, evidence of the density advantages of the 7 nm node.

Clock speeds reflect this architectural and process evolution. The Tesla M4 has a base clock of 872 MHz and a boost clock of 1072 MHz. The RX 5500 XT starts at 1607 MHz base and boosts to 1845 MHz, with a game clock of 1717 MHz. The AMD card's clocks are roughly 84% higher at base and 72% higher at boost, which contributes significantly to its performance advantage.

The memory subsystems also differ markedly. The Tesla M4 features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, running at 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective speed, yielding a bandwidth of 88.00 GB/s. The RX 5500 XT also has 4 GB of memory, but it is GDDR6 on the same 128-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. This results in a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s, which is 154% higher than the Tesla M4. The GDDR6 memory operates at more than double the effective data rate, directly doubling the available memory bandwidth for the same bus width.

Compute resource counts show the RX 5500 XT has more of everything. It features 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Tesla M4 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The ROP count is identical at 32, but the AMD card has 37.5% more shading units and 37.5% more texture mapping units.

The resulting throughput numbers are telling. The Tesla M4 achieves a pixel rate of 34.30 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 68.61 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 2.195 TFLOPS. The RX 5500 XT delivers 59.04 GPixel/s pixel rate, 162.4 GTexel/s texture rate, and 5.196 TFLOPS FP32. The AMD card is 72% faster in pixel fill, 137% faster in texture fill, and 137% faster in FP32 compute. The RX 5500 XT also supports FP16 at 10.39 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the Tesla M4 does not appear to expose in the database.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The Tesla M4 has a TDP of 50 W, while the RX 5500 XT has a TDP of 130 W. The suggested PSU for the Tesla M4 is 250 W, while the RX 5500 XT asks for 300 W. The Tesla M4 does not require any power connectors, while the RX 5500 XT requires a single 8-pin connector. The Tesla M4 is a single-slot card, while the RX 5500 XT is dual-slot.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The Tesla M4 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The RX 5500 XT also has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the Tesla M4 has no display outputs at all, reflecting its intended role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT has significantly higher clocks, with a base of 1607 MHz and boost of 1845 MHz, compared to the NVIDIA Tesla M4's base of 872 MHz and boost of 1072 MHz.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The RX 5500 XT has a memory bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s using GDDR6 memory, while the Tesla M4 has 88.00 GB/s using GDDR5. Both use a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M4 has a TDP of 50 W and requires no power connectors, while the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT has a TDP of 130 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are listed as End-of-life in the database. The Tesla M4 was released on 2015-11-09, and the RX 5500 XT was released on 2019-12-11.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 according to the recorded data.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 5500 XT has a transistor density of 40.5M per mm² on a 158 mm² die with 6,400 million transistors, while the Tesla M4 has 12.9M per mm² on a 228 mm² die with 2,940 million transistors.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the superior performer in raw compute tasks. The OpenCL benchmark shows it leading by 63.9% over the Tesla M4, and its architectural advantages in clock speed, memory bandwidth, shading units, and process node all point to a much more capable processor. The RX 5500 XT also offers display outputs, making it a functional graphics card for everyday use, whereas the Tesla M4 is a compute-only accelerator with no display outputs.

However, the Tesla M4 has one significant advantage: power efficiency. At 50 W TDP versus 130 W, it draws 61.5% less power. For environments where power is limited or heat dissipation is a concern, this could be a deciding factor. The Tesla M4 also requires no additional power connectors, simplifying installation in systems without available PCIe power cables.

The performance context matters too. The Tesla M4's average benchmark score of 16932 places it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs, which is higher than the RX 5500 XT's 57th percentile despite the RX 5500 XT winning the head-to-head OpenCL test. This is because the RX 5500 XT's average score of 14692 is pulled down by its lower scores in other tests, such as Passmark DirectX 9 (133), Passmark DirectX 10 (46), Passmark DirectX 11 (56), and Passmark DirectX 12 (40). Its strength is clearly in compute workloads like Geekbench OpenCL (46965), Geekbench Metal (54842), and Geekbench Vulkan (44191), as well as Passmark G3D (9083) and Passmark GPU Compute (4446).

For compute-centric applications that leverage OpenCL, Metal, or Vulkan, the RX 5500 XT is the clear winner. For scenarios where power draw is critical and the workload is less demanding, the Tesla M4 offers a viable alternative with its low 50 W TDP. The RX 5500 XT is also a more versatile product due to its display outputs and support for FP16 compute.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: NVIDIA Tesla M4 uses GM206, AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT uses Navi 14
• Architecture: Maxwell 2.0 vs RDNA 1.0
• Process Node: 28 nm vs 7 nm
• Transistors: 2,940 million vs 6,400 million
• Die Size: 228 mm² vs 158 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.9M / mm² vs 40.5M / mm²
• Base Clock: 872 MHz vs 1607 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1072 MHz vs 1845 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective vs 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective
• Memory Type: GDDR5 vs GDDR6
• Memory Bandwidth: 88.00 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 1024 vs 1408
• TMUs: 64 vs 88
• Pixel Rate: 34.30 GPixel/s vs 59.04 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 68.61 GTexel/s vs 162.4 GTexel/s
• FP32: 2.195 TFLOPS vs 5.196 TFLOPS
• FP16: Not available vs 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 50 W vs 130 W
• Slot Width: Single-slot vs Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: None vs 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 250 W vs 300 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x8
• Display Outputs: No outputs vs 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Release Date: 2015-11-09 vs 2019-12-11
• Generation: Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) vs Navi (RX 5000)
• Predecessor: Tesla Kepler vs Vega
• Successor: Tesla Pascal vs Navi II
• Launch MSRP: Not available vs 169 USD

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT wins decisively in raw performance metrics. The recorded OpenCL benchmark shows it is 63.9% faster than the Tesla M4. Its FP32 compute of 5.196 TFLOPS is more than double the Tesla M4's 2.195 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 162.4 GTexel/s is more than double the Tesla M4's 68.61 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s is 154% higher. These advantages make it the clear choice for compute-intensive workloads in OpenCL, Metal, or Vulkan environments.

The RX 5500 XT also wins in versatility. It has display outputs, allowing it to function as a standard graphics card for gaming or general desktop use. It supports FP16 compute at 10.39 TFLOPS, opening up workloads that can utilize reduced precision. Its dual-slot design with an 8-pin power connector indicates it is designed for consumer desktop use, and its 169 USD launch MSRP positions it as a mainstream product.

The NVIDIA Tesla M4 wins in power efficiency. Its 50 W TDP is 61.5% lower than the RX 5500 XT's 130 W. It requires no power connectors and has a lower suggested PSU of 250 W versus 300 W. Its single-slot design makes it easier to fit in dense server configurations. For environments with strict power budgets or thermal constraints, this efficiency advantage could outweigh its performance deficit. The Tesla M4 is designed for compute acceleration in servers, as evidenced by its lack of display outputs, and its predecessor is Tesla Kepler with a successor of Tesla Pascal. Its 60th percentile ranking on average benchmark score, which is higher than the RX 5500 XT's 57th, suggests that for workloads similar to the Geekbench OpenCL test it performs competently relative to the rest of the GPU landscape, even if it cannot match the AMD card in absolute terms.