AMD Radeon RX 560X vs NVIDIA Tesla K80 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K80 and AMD Radeon RX 560X represent two very different approaches to GPU design, separated by nearly four years of architectural evolution. The K80 is a dual-GPU compute accelerator built on a 28 nm process, while the RX 560X is a single-chip consumer card on a 14 nm process. Benchmark data shows a remarkably even split: each card wins one of the two head-to-head tests, with the K80 taking the OpenCL workload and the RX 560X taking the Vulkan workload. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the K80 at 18866 and the RX 560X at 18626, a difference of only 1.3%. This close overall performance masks significant differences in how each card achieves its results.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla K80 demonstrates its strength in OpenCL compute workloads. In the geekbench_opencl test, the K80 scores 18620 against the RX 560X's 17020, a decisive 9.4% advantage. This result aligns with the K80's design as a dedicated compute accelerator with a dual-GPU configuration. The card's 2496 shading units and 48 ROPs provide substantial raw processing capability, and its 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus delivers 240.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The K80's average benchmark score of 18866 places it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (18789, only 0.4% lower) and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18954, 0.5% higher). This puts the K80 in competitive territory with much newer consumer cards, despite its 2014 release date.

The AMD Radeon RX 560X takes the Vulkan workload with a score of 20231 against the K80's 19111, a 5.5% margin in favor of AMD. This is a significant win because Vulkan is a modern low-level API that benefits from the RX 560X's newer GCN 4.0 architecture. The RX 560X achieves this with only 1024 shading units and 16 ROPs, but its 14 nm process node allows for higher clock speeds: a 1175 MHz base and 1275 MHz boost, compared to the K80's 562 MHz base and 824 MHz boost. The RX 560X's average score of 18626 places it in the 62nd percentile, just one point behind the K80. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18685, 0.3% higher) and the AMD FirePro D500 (18533, 0.5% lower), showing that the RX 560X holds its own against professional-grade cards.

The data shows a clear split: the K80 is optimized for compute-heavy OpenCL tasks, while the RX 560X excels in API-specific workloads that leverage its architectural efficiency. The K80's dual-GPU design doubles the shading units and texture mapping units compared to the RX 560X, but the RX 560X compensates with higher clock speeds and a more modern instruction set. In terms of raw throughput, the K80's 4.113 TFLOPS FP32 performance dwarfs the RX 560X's 2.611 TFLOPS, yet the newer card still manages to win the Vulkan test by a comfortable margin.

The Verdict

The NVIDIA Tesla K80 is the choice for compute-focused workloads that rely on OpenCL. Its 9.4% lead in the OpenCL benchmark, combined with double the memory capacity (12 GB vs 4 GB) and more than double the memory bandwidth (240.6 GB/s vs 112.0 GB/s), makes it suitable for data-heavy tasks such as scientific simulation or machine learning inference. The K80's 63rd percentile ranking and its proximity to the RTX 2070 in average score (0.4% difference) indicate that it remains a viable compute solution despite its age. Its 300 W TDP and requirement for a 700 W power supply reflect its enterprise-grade design, and its lack of display outputs confirms its role as an accelerator rather than a general-purpose graphics card.

The AMD Radeon RX 560X is the better option for Vulkan-based applications and general graphics use. Its 5.5% win in the Vulkan benchmark demonstrates architectural advantages that the K80 cannot match, despite the K80's superior raw specs. The RX 560X offers display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a), a much lower 75 W TDP with no power connectors required, and a 250 W suggested PSU. This makes it a drop-in solution for existing systems, whereas the K80 demands significant power delivery infrastructure. The RX 560X's 14 nm process node and 24.4M transistors per square millimeter density (compared to the K80's 12.7M) highlight the efficiency gains of newer manufacturing.

For users who need raw compute throughput and have the power budget, the K80 is the data-backed choice. For users who need a functional graphics card with modern API support, the RX 560X is the clear winner. The two cards tie in their head-to-head win count at one each, but the nature of those wins matters: the K80's OpenCL victory is by a larger margin (9.4%) than the RX 560X's Vulkan victory (5.5%), yet the Vulkan win represents compatibility with a forward-looking API. The K80's DirectX support is limited to 12 (11_1) while the RX 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), and the RX 560X supports Vulkan 1.3 compared to the K80's 1.2.175.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has an average benchmark score of 18866, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 560X's 18626. This gives the K80 a 1.3% advantage in overall average performance.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 scores 18620 in the geekbench_opencl test, while the AMD Radeon RX 560X scores 17020. The K80 wins this test by 9.4%.

Q: Which card wins in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560X scores 20231 in the geekbench_vulkan test, beating the NVIDIA Tesla K80's 19111. The RX 560X wins by 5.5%.

Q: What are the memory capacity and bandwidth differences?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory with 240.6 GB/s bandwidth on a 384-bit bus. The AMD Radeon RX 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has a 300 W TDP and requires a 700 W suggested power supply with a single 8-pin connector. The AMD Radeon RX 560X has a 75 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and has a 250 W suggested power supply.

Q: How do the cards compare in terms of display outputs?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has no display outputs, making it strictly a compute accelerator. The AMD Radeon RX 560X includes 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Specification Differences

The NVIDIA Tesla K80 and AMD Radeon RX 560X differ across nearly every major specification category. The K80 uses the GK210 chip with Kepler 2.0 architecture, while the RX 560X uses the Polaris 21 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture. The K80 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, whereas the RX 560X uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts differ substantially: the K80 has 7,100 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, while the RX 560X has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. This results in transistor densities of 12.7M per square millimeter for the K80 and 24.4M for the RX 560X.

Clock speeds favor the RX 560X significantly. The K80 operates at 562 MHz base and 824 MHz boost, while the RX 560X runs at 1175 MHz base and 1275 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the K80 uses 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) while the RX 560X uses 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The K80 has 2496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, compared to the RX 560X's 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. Pixel and texture rates reflect these differences: the K80 achieves 42.85 GPixel/s and 171.4 GTexel/s, while the RX 560X achieves 20.40 GPixel/s and 81.60 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance also diverges, with the K80 delivering 4.113 TFLOPS versus the RX 560X's 2.611 TFLOPS. The RX 560X additionally supports FP16 at 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the K80 has no listed FP16 capability. Physical dimensions differ: the K80 is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, while the RX 560X is 170 mm (6.7 inches) long. Both are dual-slot cards. The K80 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the RX 560X uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Power consumption is dramatically different at 300 W for the K80 versus 75 W for the RX 560X, and the K80 requires a 700 W suggested PSU versus 250 W for the RX 560X.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards is substantial. The NVIDIA Tesla K80 uses Kepler 2.0 architecture with the GK210 chip, representing NVIDIA's second-generation Kepler design. This architecture was built for compute density, evidenced by the dual-GPU configuration that doubles resources within a single card. The K80's 7,100 million transistors on a 561 mm² die reflect a design philosophy prioritizing sheer compute power over efficiency. Its 28 nm TSMC process was state-of-the-art for its 2014 release, but it cannot match the density of newer nodes.

The AMD Radeon RX 560X uses GCN 4.0 architecture with the Polaris 21 chip, a fourth-generation Graphics Core Next design. This architecture brought significant improvements in instruction efficiency and power management. The 14 nm GlobalFoundries process allows the RX 560X to achieve 24.4M transistors per square millimeter, nearly double the K80's density. The RX 560X's 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die demonstrate the efficiency gains of the newer process node. The architecture supports modern API features including DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the K80 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

The K80's Kepler 2.0 architecture includes no FP16 support, while the RX 560X's GCN 4.0 provides FP16 at 1:1 ratio matching its FP32 throughput. This makes the RX 560X more versatile for mixed-precision workloads. The K80's architecture was designed with no display outputs, emphasizing its role as a server-side accelerator. The RX 560X includes full display connectivity, reflecting its consumer market positioning. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 560X's newer architecture handles modern rendering features more efficiently. The K80's tessellation and geometry processing were designed for compute tasks, while the RX 560X balances compute with graphics rendering capabilities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark tests provide a clear picture of each card's strengths. In geekbench_opencl, the NVIDIA Tesla K80 scores 18620 against the AMD Radeon RX 560X's 17020. This 9.4% delta represents the K80's largest victory and aligns with its compute-focused design. The K80's 2496 shading units and 240.6 GB/s memory bandwidth provide substantial raw compute throughput that the RX 560X cannot match despite its higher clock speeds. This win is particularly notable because OpenCL is a widely used compute API, making the K80's advantage relevant for scientific and professional applications.

In geekbench_vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX 560X reverses the result with a score of 20231 against the K80's 19111. The 5.5% margin shows that the RX 560X's newer architecture handles Vulkan's explicit control model more effectively. Vulkan 1.3 support on the RX 560X compared to Vulkan 1.2.175 on the K80 suggests better optimization for modern rendering pipelines. The RX 560X achieves this win with only 1024 shading units, relying on its 1275 MHz boost clock and architectural efficiency rather than brute force.

The average benchmark scores confirm the close overall competition: the K80 averages 18866 while the RX 560X averages 18626, a 1.3% difference. The K80's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 19030 (0.9% higher), while the RX 560X's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT at 18685 (0.3% higher). Both cards sit in the low 60s percentile ranking, with the K80 at 63 and the RX 560X at 62. These figures indicate that despite their age and different design philosophies, both cards deliver comparable overall performance, with the choice between them depending entirely on the workload and API requirements.