AMD Radeon RX 6500M vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c and AMD Radeon RX 6500M are separated by nearly a decade of GPU architecture, yet both appear in the same benchmark database as end-of-life products. The data shows a single head-to-head comparison where the AMD part dominates, but the full picture of their respective positions requires examining each card's broader benchmark profile and hardware characteristics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 38,586 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c manages 11,479 points. This translates to a delta of -70.3% for the NVIDIA part, meaning the AMD card outperforms it by roughly 3.4 times in this compute workload. The margin is enormous, reflecting not just clock speed advantages but a fundamentally different approach to parallel processing.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces this gap. The Tesla K20c's average benchmark score of 11,479 places it within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528) and 1.3% below the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11,627). It also sits 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680) and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (11,261). These deltas are tight, indicating the K20c performs in a narrow band around its score. The RX 6500M, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 10,362 across all its tests. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 at 10,400 (-0.4% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A at 10,273 (+0.9% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 550X at 10,481 (-1.1% delta), and the AMD Radeon R9 M275X at 10,582 (-2.1% delta). While the OpenCL score for the RX 6500M is far higher than its average, that average is pulled down by other tests.

The key observation is that the OpenCL result is the only benchmark where both cards appear. In that test, the RX 6500M's score of 38,586 is over three times the K20c's 11,479. However, the RX 6500M's own average score across nine benchmarks is 10,362, which is actually lower than the K20c's only score. This suggests the RX 6500M has highly variable performance depending on the workload, excelling in OpenCL compute while scoring lower in other areas like DirectX and 2D tests.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6500M wins the only direct benchmark, and its advantage in OpenCL is substantial. The data shows wins in additional tests for the RX 6500M, including Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 43,837, and Passmark tests for DirectX 9 (92), DirectX 11 (70), DirectX 10 (52), and DirectX 12 (34). Its Passmark G3D score is 7,531, and its GPU compute score is 2,669. The 2D performance is represented by a Passmark G2D score of 385.

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c has no benchmark wins in the dataset. Its single OpenCL score of 11,479 is its only recorded performance metric. This means there is no data showing any test where the K20c outperforms the RX 6500M. The RX 6500M's wins are not just about raw compute; they span multiple API generations. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support and Vulkan 1.4 API level are newer than the K20c's DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, which likely contributes to its performance in those specific tests.

For use-case analysis, the RX 6500M appears better suited for modern compute workloads that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan, given its massive lead in those areas. The K20c, with no other recorded benchmarks, cannot be said to win any specific workload category based on available data. Its only score places it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6500M sits at the 48th percentile, but percentile rank is based on average scores, not the head-to-head result.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference in the only shared benchmark?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 38,586 versus the NVIDIA Tesla K20c's 11,479, a delta of -70.3% for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20c has an average benchmark score of 11,479, while the AMD Radeon RX 6500M has an average of 10,362 across its nine recorded benchmarks.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The K20c is within 1.9% of its nearest rivals, ranging from 1.9% ahead of the GTX 780M to 1.7% behind the GTX 1660. The RX 6500M is within 2.1% of its rivals, from 0.9% ahead of the GTX 950A to 2.1% behind the R9 M275X.

Q: What API support does each card offer?

A: The RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The K20c supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: Which card has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The RX 6500M has a pixel rate of 76.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 153.6 GTexel/s, both higher than the K20c's 36.71 GPixel/s and 146.8 GTexel/s.

Q: How many benchmark wins does each card have in the head-to-head?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500M has 1 win, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20c has 0 wins.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measured specification. Memory capacity is 5 GB for the K20c versus 4 GB for the RX 6500M. Memory type is GDDR5 versus GDDR6. Bus width is 320 bit versus 64 bit, and bandwidth is 208.0 GB/s versus 144.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) for the K20c, while the RX 6500M runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Shading units number 2496 for the K20c and 1024 for the RX 6500M. Texture mapping units are 208 versus 64, and ROPs are 40 versus 32. The K20c has no ray tracing cores, while the RX 6500M has 16. Neither has tensor cores.

The K20c has no base or boost clock listed, only a memory clock, while the RX 6500M has a base clock of 2000 MHz, boost of 2400 MHz, and game clock of 2191 MHz. The RX 6500M has a higher pixel rate (76.80 vs 36.71 GPixel/s), texture rate (153.6 vs 146.8 GTexel/s), and FP32 performance (4.915 vs 3.524 TFLOPS). The RX 6500M also has FP16 performance of 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1), which the K20c does not list.

Thermal design power is vastly different: 50 W for the RX 6500M versus 225 W for the K20c. The K20c is dual-slot with 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 550 W, while the RX 6500M is IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The K20c has no display outputs and a length of 267 mm (10.5 inches), while the RX 6500M's display outputs are portable-device dependent with no dimensions listed.

The bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for the K20c and PCIe 4.0 x4 for the RX 6500M.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Tesla K20c uses the GK110 chip on the Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². It belongs to the Tesla Kepler (Kxx) generation and its predecessor is Tesla Fermi, with Tesla Maxwell as the successor.

The AMD Radeon RX 6500M uses the Navi 24 chip on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². It belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) series and generation, with Polaris Mobile as its predecessor and no successor listed.

The process node difference is significant: 28 nm versus 6 nm. The RX 6500M has over four times the transistor density despite fewer total transistors. The K20c's die is over five times larger. Both use TSMC as the foundry.

The RX 6500M has 16 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the K20c. The K20c has more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, but the RX 6500M compensates with higher clocks and newer architecture. The RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the K20c is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The K20c's release date of November 2012 versus January 2022 for the RX 6500M explains most architectural gaps.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon RX 6500M as the clear winner in the only direct comparison available. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 38,586 versus 11,479 for the NVIDIA Tesla K20c is a decisive margin, and it also wins every other benchmark it appears in. The RX 6500M's higher FP32 throughput (4.915 vs 3.524 TFLOPS), superior pixel rate (76.80 vs 36.71 GPixel/s), and modern ray tracing support make it the more capable part for contemporary workloads.

However, the K20c is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 11,479 is actually higher than the RX 6500M's average of 10,362, suggesting more consistent performance across the tests where it does appear. The K20c also has more memory (5 GB vs 4 GB), wider memory bus (320 bit vs 64 bit), and higher memory bandwidth (208.0 GB/s vs 144.0 GB/s). For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth rather than raw compute, the K20c may hold an advantage, though no benchmark data directly confirms this.

The RX 6500M's lower TDP of 50 W versus 225 W makes it far more power-efficient. Its integrated form factor with no power connectors contrasts sharply with the K20c's dual-slot design and external power requirements. The RX 6500M supports newer APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the K20c lags at DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Who should pick which? The RX 6500M is the choice for anyone needing modern compute performance, especially in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, or for systems where power consumption and physical footprint matter. The K20c may suit scenarios requiring higher memory bandwidth or larger memory capacity, but its lack of benchmark wins and older architecture make it a harder recommendation. The percentile ranks are close—51st for the K20c versus 48th for the RX 6500M—but the head-to-head result is unambiguous. The AMD part wins on compute, API support, and efficiency, while the NVIDIA part offers only theoretical memory advantages that the data does not validate.