AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla K40c Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K40c and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT represent two very different eras of GPU design, and the single head-to-head benchmark available shows just how far apart they are in compute philosophy. The Tesla K40c is a compute-oriented card from 2013, while the RX 5700 XT is a gaming-focused GPU from 2019. This comparison is less about a close contest and more about understanding what each card was built to do, based strictly on the data provided.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisively one-sided. The NVIDIA Tesla K40c scores 17,468 points, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 9,524 points. This gives the Tesla K40c a massive 83.4% advantage in this specific workload. This is a substantial lead, placing the Tesla K40c firmly ahead in raw OpenCL compute performance as measured by this test.

This result is interesting because it goes against the overall average benchmark scores. The Tesla K40c has an average benchmark score of 17,468, while the RX 5700 XT has an average of 16,361. Despite the RX 5700 XT having a lower average score, it is important to note that its average is pulled down by a wide range of tests, including older DirectX and 2D benchmarks. The Tesla K40c only has one benchmark entry, which is that single OpenCL score.

In terms of overall standing, the two cards are very close. The Tesla K40c sits in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5700 XT sits in the 59th percentile. Their nearest rivals also reflect this proximity. The Tesla K40c is within 1% of the AMD Radeon 780M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, and essentially tied with the AMD Radeon Pro 460 and Pro 560. The RX 5700 XT is similarly clustered, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at a 0.1% delta, and it is also within 1% of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell and AMD Radeon PRO W7500. The data shows that while the Tesla K40c wins the OpenCL test decisively, the broader performance picture is much closer.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is enormous. The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK180 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,080 million transistors onto a 561 mm² die. In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. This newer process allows AMD to fit 10,300 million transistors onto a much smaller 251 mm² die. The transistor density reflects this, with the RX 5700 XT at 41.0M / mm² compared to the Tesla K40c's 12.6M / mm².

The memory subsystems are also fundamentally different. The Tesla K40c uses 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s. The RX 5700 XT counters with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, but achieves a much higher bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The newer, faster GDDR6 memory more than compensates for the narrower bus.

In terms of compute units, the Tesla K40c has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 raster output units (ROPs). The RX 5700 XT has fewer shading units at 2,560 and fewer TMUs at 160, but has more ROPs at 64. This configuration suggests a different workload focus. The clock speeds also tell a story: the Tesla K40c runs at a base of 745 MHz with a boost of 876 MHz, while the RX 5700 XT runs at a base of 1605 MHz with a boost of 1905 MHz and a game clock of 1755 MHz. The vastly higher clocks on the AMD card are a direct result of the more efficient 7nm process.

The feature sets are also from different generations. The Tesla K40c supports PCIe 3.0 x16 and has No outputs, meaning it is not designed for display at all. The RX 5700 XT supports the newer PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and has standard display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. In terms of API support, the RX 5700 XT is ahead with DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Tesla K40c is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA Tesla K40c wins in the specific area of OpenCL compute performance. Its score of 17,468 in Geekbench OpenCL is its defining strength. This points to a card that was designed for general-purpose GPU computing, scientific simulation, and other professional workloads that leverage OpenCL. Its 12 GB of memory is also a significant asset for large datasets that need to be held on the GPU.

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT, while losing the OpenCL test, shows its strengths across a broader range of benchmarks. Its average score of 16,361 across 11 different tests, including PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, Geekbench Vulkan, and Geekbench Metal, indicates a more versatile card. It is clearly designed for graphics rendering and gaming, as evidenced by its display outputs and support for modern APIs. The RX 5700 XT also shows a massive advantage in theoretical throughput, with 9.754 TFLOPS of FP32 compute compared to the Tesla K40c's 5.046 TFLOPS. It also supports FP16 at 19.51 TFLOPS (2:1), which the Tesla K40c does not. The RX 5700 XT also has a higher pixel rate of 121.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 304.8 GTexel/s, compared to the Tesla K40c's 52.56 GPixel/s and 210.2 GTexel/s. These numbers suggest that the RX 5700 XT would be far superior in rasterization-heavy tasks like gaming.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice is clear based on intended use. The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is for a specific, professional compute audience. Its 83.4% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test, combined with its 12 GB memory capacity, makes it a viable option for legacy compute tasks that rely on OpenCL. Its lack of display outputs confirms it is not a desktop graphics card. It launched at a price of 7,699 USD, reflecting its professional positioning.

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is the better choice for almost anyone else. Its support for modern graphics APIs like DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, along with its display outputs, makes it a functional graphics card. While it loses the OpenCL test, its higher FP32 throughput, pixel rate, and texture rate, combined with its higher clocks, indicate it would be dramatically faster in any graphics-intensive workload. Its launch MSRP was 399 USD, and its performance profile is that of a consumer gaming GPU. For a general-purpose user, a gamer, or anyone needing a card with video outputs, the RX 5700 XT is the only sensible option. The Tesla K40c is a specialist tool, and its benchmark win is in a narrow, professional niche.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is significantly faster, scoring 17,468 compared to the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT's 9,524, a difference of 83.4%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40c has an average benchmark score of 17,468. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT has an average benchmark score of 16,361.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40c has more memory with 12 GB of GDDR5, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla K40c have display outputs?

A: No, the data shows it has No outputs. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT, in contrast, has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is built on a 28 nm process, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is built on a much more advanced 7 nm process.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute rating?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT has a higher FP32 rating at 9.754 TFLOPS, compared to the NVIDIA Tesla K40c's 5.046 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla K40c | AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 745 MHz | 1605 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 876 MHz | 1905 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 1755 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2880 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 240 | 160 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.56 GPixel/s | 121.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 210.2 GTexel/s | 304.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.046 TFLOPS | 9.754 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | N/A | 19.51 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Launch MSRP | 7,699 USD | 399 USD |