AMD Radeon RX 550X vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has an average benchmark score of 12625, while the AMD Radeon RX 550X scores 10481. The Tesla K20Xm sits at the 52nd percentile among all GPUs, compared to the RX 550X's 49th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head OpenCL test?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm scores 17215 versus the AMD Radeon RX 550X's 9662, a 78.2% advantage for the Tesla part.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 249.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 550X has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has the lower power draw?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has a TDP of 235 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: What is the release date for each product?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm was released on November 11, 2012. The AMD Radeon RX 550X was released on December 15, 2018.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern API versions?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is built on the GK110 chip using the Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The die contains 7,080 million transistors across a 561 mm² area, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². This is a compute-oriented design with no display outputs, reflecting its position in the Tesla Kepler generation.

The AMD Radeon RX 550X uses the Lexa chip with the GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500X) generation. GlobalFoundries produces this chip on a 14 nm process with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, giving a higher transistor density of 21.4 million per mm². Unlike the Tesla, this card includes display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The fundamental architectural split is stark. The Tesla K20Xm packs 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The RX 550X has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Tesla's raw compute resources dwarf the AMD part, which explains its massive lead in the OpenCL benchmark despite being six years older.

Clock behavior also diverges. The Tesla's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database, while the RX 550X has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1183 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the Tesla runs at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), while the RX 550X operates at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The Tesla compensates with a much wider memory bus.

The Tesla lacks any display functionality, making it unsuitable for desktop use, whereas the RX 550X is a fully featured graphics card. The RX 550X also supports FP16 at 1:1 ratio (1,211.4 GFLOPS), a feature the Tesla does not list. API support favors the AMD card with Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12_0, versus Vulkan 1.2.175 and DirectX 11_0 for the Tesla.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. This is a decisive win for the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm, which scores 17215 against the RX 550X's 9662, a delta of 78.2%. This is not a marginal victory; the Tesla delivers nearly double the OpenCL throughput, a reflection of its 2,688 shading units versus 512 and its 249.6 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 96.00 GB/s.

To contextualize the Tesla's score, its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT (12710, -0.7%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12773, -1.2%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12830, -1.6%). The Tesla's average score of 12625 places it just below these cards, all within a 1.6% band. This indicates that the Tesla K20Xm, despite its age and compute-focused design, competes with mid-range gaming GPUs from later generations in synthetic OpenCL workloads.

The RX 550X's nearest rivals tell a different story. Its average score of 10481 is bracketed by the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (10400, +0.8%), the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (10582, -1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6500M (10362, +1.2%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10629, -1.4%). The RX 550X sits in a cluster of lower-tier mobile and entry-level desktop parts, with all rivals within 1.4% of its score. This places the RX 550X in a performance tier roughly 20% below the Tesla K20Xm's average.

The single benchmark available does not cover Vulkan for the Tesla, nor Metal for the RX 550X. The RX 550X does record a Geekbench Vulkan score of 11299, which is higher than its OpenCL result, but there is no comparable Vulkan data for the Tesla to enable a direct comparison. The wins tally stands at 1 for the Tesla and 0 for the RX 550X in recorded head-to-head tests.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The process nodes are distinct: 28 nm (TSMC) for the Tesla versus 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) for the RX 550X. Transistor counts are 7,080 million versus 2,200 million, and die sizes are 561 mm² versus 103 mm². The transistor density favors the AMD part: 21.4M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm².

Memory configurations diverge completely. The Tesla offers 6 GB, a 384-bit bus, and 249.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 550X has 4 GB, a 128-bit bus, and 96.00 GB/s. Memory clocks are 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps) for the Tesla and 1500 MHz (6 Gbps) for the RX 550X.

Compute resources are heavily lopsided. The Tesla has 2,688 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, versus 512, 32, and 16 for the RX 550X. Pixel rates are 40.99 GPixel/s against 18.93 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 164.0 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.935 TFLOPS for the Tesla and 1,211.4 GFLOPS for the AMD card.

Power requirements scale with performance. The Tesla is rated at 235 W TDP with a 550 W suggested PSU. The RX 550X draws 50 W and needs only a 250 W PSU. The Tesla uses a dual-slot cooler with unknown power connectors, while the RX 550X is also dual-slot but requires no external power connectors, drawing all power from the slot.

The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Tesla and PCIe 3.0 x8 for the RX 550X. Physical size also varies: the Tesla measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, while the RX 550X is 145 mm (5.7 inches). Display outputs are absent on the Tesla but present on the RX 550X as listed above. API support favors AMD: DirectX 12_0, Vulkan 1.3, versus DirectX 11_0, Vulkan 1.2.175 for NVIDIA. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Tesla has a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD; the RX 550X has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in intended use cases. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is the superior compute performer, with an average benchmark score 20.5% higher (12625 versus 10481) and a 78.2% lead in the only direct head-to-head OpenCL test. Its 2,688 shading units, 249.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 3.935 TFLOPS of FP32 performance make it a dedicated compute accelerator. The absence of display outputs confirms this role.

However, the Tesla comes with significant trade-offs. It consumes 235 W versus 50 W, requires a 550 W PSU instead of 250 W, and is physically longer at 267 mm versus 145 mm. It also lacks modern API support, offering only DirectX 11_0 and Vulkan 1.2.175 compared to the RX 550X's DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.3. The Tesla's release date of 2012 also means it predates the RX 550X by six years, yet it still outperforms it in compute workloads.

The AMD Radeon RX 550X is the more balanced product for general graphics use. It has display outputs, a lower power footprint, and newer API support. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon R9 M275X and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S, all sit within 1.4% of its average score, indicating it is a mid-to-low-tier part in its own generation. It is not a compute monster, but it is a functional graphics card.

For users who need raw OpenCL compute and already have the power budget and physical space, the Tesla K20Xm is the clear choice from the recorded data. For users who need a display output and modern driver features, the RX 550X is the only viable option between these two, given the Tesla's lack of outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm wins outright in compute-heavy scenarios. Its OpenCL score of 17215 versus 9662 is a 78.2% margin. The Tesla also wins on memory bandwidth (249.6 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s), pixel rate (40.99 GPixel/s versus 18.93 GPixel/s), texture rate (164.0 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s), and FP32 throughput (3.935 TFLOPS versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS). It also has more memory capacity (6 GB versus 4 GB) and a wider bus (384-bit versus 128-bit). For any workload that stresses shading units, texture fill, or memory bandwidth, the Tesla is the dominant part.

The AMD Radeon RX 550X wins in power efficiency and modern feature support. Its TDP of 50 W is one-fifth of the Tesla's 235 W, and its suggested PSU of 250 W is less than half the Tesla's 550 W. The RX 550X also wins on API modernity: DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.3 versus DirectX 11_0 and Vulkan 1.2.175. It offers display outputs, which the Tesla lacks entirely. The RX 550X also has a higher memory clock (1500 MHz versus 1300 MHz) and a higher transistor density (21.4M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm²), though these do not translate into performance wins.

For a user building a low-power system or needing a card that outputs video, the RX 550X is the only choice. For a compute node where power and size are secondary, the Tesla K20Xm's performance advantage is decisive. The recorded data shows no benchmark where the RX 550X beats the Tesla; the wins tally is 1 for the Tesla and 0 for the AMD card. The RX 550X's Vulkan score of 11299 is its best recorded result, but no comparable Tesla Vulkan score exists in the database to establish a head-to-head comparison.