AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla M60 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M60 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape, yet the recorded data places them within striking distance of each other in aggregate benchmark standing. The Tesla M60 is a datacenter passively-cooled accelerator from the Maxwell 2.0 era with no display outputs, while the RX 6750 XT is a consumer RDNA 2.0 gaming card with a full modern feature set. The database shows an unusual split: the M60 sits in the 75th percentile against all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 30490, while the RX 6750 XT sits in the 71st percentile with an average score of 26011, yet the head-to-head results are split one apiece, with each card dominating a different compute API.

The Verdict

The data supports a clean division of use cases. The RX 6750 XT is the clear choice for gaming and general desktop graphics work: it has 40 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, a 12 GB GDDR6 frame buffer pushing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, and a Vulkan benchmark score roughly three times that of the M60. The Tesla M60 makes sense only where its OpenCL throughput matters: its geekbench_opencl score of 29506 is 80 percent higher than the RX 6750 XT's 16360, which makes it the pick for legacy OpenCL compute workloads on older server platforms via its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Note also that the M60 has no launch MSRP recorded and is end-of-life, as is the RX 6750 XT; the latter carries a recorded launch MSRP of 549 USD. Anyone whose workload mixes modern graphics APIs and gaming should pick the AMD card outright; anyone running OpenCL kernels in a headless rack environment is the narrow case where the M60 still posts the stronger number.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the head-to-head benchmark matchup?

A: The recorded data shows a 1-1 split. The Tesla M60 wins geekbench_opencl with 29506 versus 16360, an 80 percent advantage. The RX 6750 XT wins geekbench_vulkan with 98089 versus 31473, a gap of nearly 68 percent in its favor.

Q: How do the two compare against the broader GPU database?

A: The Tesla M60 ranks in the 75th percentile versus all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 30490. The RX 6750 XT ranks in the 71st percentile with an average score of 26011. The M60 is therefore slightly higher in aggregate standing despite being the older design.

Q: Which rivals sit closest to each card?

A: The M60's nearest rivals by average score are the NVIDIA CMP 70HX (30476, effectively tied), the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (30433, 0.2 percent behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (30095), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti (29945). The RX 6750 XT's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25891), AMD FirePro W7100 (25856), AMD FirePro D700 (25842), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25740).

Q: Does either card support ray tracing?

A: Only the RX 6750 XT. It has 40 ray tracing cores as part of its RDNA 2.0 architecture. The Maxwell 2.0-based Tesla M60 has no RT cores.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6750 XT, at 432.0 GB/s over a 192-bit GDDR6 bus running at 18 Gbps effective. The M60 delivers 160.4 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR5 bus at 5 Gbps effective.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The database lists both as end-of-life. The M60 was released in August 2015 and succeeded by the Tesla Pascal line; the RX 6750 XT was released in March 2022 and succeeded by Navi III.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different technological generations, and the gap shows in every physical metric. The Tesla M60 uses the GM204 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, packing 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die for a density of 13.1 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 6750 XT uses the Navi 22 chip on TSMC's 7 nm process, fitting 17,200 million transistors into a smaller 335 mm² die, more than triple the density at 51.3 million transistors per square millimeter. That is the single largest structural difference in the comparison: more than three times the transistors on a smaller piece of silicon.

Architecturally, Maxwell 2.0 in the M60 is a pure rasterization-era design with no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. RDNA 2.0 in the RX 6750 XT adds 40 ray tracing cores, and the card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), the higher feature level. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 on the M60 versus PCIe 4.0 x16 on the RX 6750 XT, which doubles host-link bandwidth on platforms that support it.

The M60's generation lineage runs from Tesla Kepler to Tesla Pascal; it is a datacenter product with no display outputs at all. The RX 6750 XT descends from Navi and leads to Navi III, and it ships with 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, marking it as a consumer card intended to drive monitors directly.

Specification Differences

The specification table diverges almost everywhere beyond slot width and length. Both cards are dual-slot designs measuring 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, and both are built at TSMC. Everything else differs.

Clocks: the M60 runs a 557 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost with memory at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The RX 6750 XT runs a 2150 MHz base, 2495 MHz game clock, and 2600 MHz boost with memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The boost clock alone is more than twice as high on the AMD card.

Compute resources: the M60 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, delivering 4.825 TFLOPS FP32, a 75.39 GPixel/s pixel rate, and a 150.8 GTexel/s texture rate. The RX 6750 XT has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and the same 64 ROPs, but delivers 13.31 TFLOPS FP32, 26.62 TFLOPS FP16 (a 2:1 ratio), 166.4 GPixel/s, and 416.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 figure is nearly three times higher on the AMD card.

Memory: 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus at 160.4 GB/s for the M60, versus 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus at 432.0 GB/s for the RX 6750 XT.

Power: the M60 has a 300 W TDP, one 8-pin connector, and a 700 W suggested PSU. The RX 6750 XT has a 250 W TDP, one 6-pin plus one 8-pin connector, and a 600 W suggested PSU. Despite far higher measured performance in the graphics-oriented tests, the newer card draws less power.

Physical data: only the RX 6750 XT records height and width (110 mm and 40 mm). The M60 records length only.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two tests overlap between the two cards in the database, and they point in opposite directions.

The first is geekbench_opencl. Here the Tesla M60 scores 29506 against the RX 6750 XT's 16360. That is an 80 percent advantage for the M60, a decisive win in OpenCL compute. This result is consistent with the M60's overall standing: its average score of 30490 across the database is built largely on this OpenCL strength, and it places the card in the 75th percentile versus all GPUs, marginally ahead of rivals like the CMP 70HX (30476) and RX 6700 (30433).

The second is geekbench_vulkan. The RX 6750 XT scores 98089 against the M60's 31473, a gap of nearly 68 percent in the AMD card's favor, roughly a 3.1x multiplier. Given that Vulkan 1.4 is the newest commonly shared API between the two, this is the more forward-looking result: any workload using Vulkan, which includes a growing share of modern game engines, will run dramatically faster on the RDNA 2.0 card.

The RX 6750 XT also carries a much broader benchmark record in the database, including a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2548, a geekbench_metal score of 137249, a PassMark G3D score of 20700, a PassMark GPU compute score of 9550, and PassMark DirectX results of 263 (DX9), 125 (DX10), 180 (DX11), and 80 (DX12), plus a 2D score of 972. The M60 has no comparable gaming-oriented entries recorded, which itself reflects its datacenter role.

The net tally in the recorded head-to-head is one win each, but the Vulkan result carries more weight for any current workload, and the RX 6750 XT's texture rate (416.0 versus 150.8 GTexel/s) and FP32 throughput (13.31 versus 4.825 TFLOPS) both explain why it dominates in graphics APIs while the older card retains an OpenCL edge likely rooted in driver and workload characteristics of its compute-focused platform.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla M60 wins in exactly one recorded scenario: OpenCL compute, where its 29506 score beats the RX 6750 XT by 80 percent. That is the entire case for this card in the database. It suits headless rack servers (no display outputs), PCIe 3.0 platforms, and legacy compute deployments where OpenCL is the interface of record.

The RX 6750 XT wins everywhere else the data reaches. It is 68 percent faster in Vulkan, roughly triples the M60's FP32 and texture throughput, offers 2.7 times the memory bandwidth, doubles the frame buffer to 12 GB, adds 40 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, connects over PCIe 4.0 x16, drives up to four displays, and does all of this at a lower 250 W TDP. Its percentile standing (71st versus 75th) trails only because the M60's average is buoyed by the single OpenCL result.

For a buyer choosing today, the decision tree is short. Gaming, ray tracing, modern APIs, multi-monitor output: RX 6750 XT, without contest. OpenCL compute in a server chassis on a PCIe 3.0 platform: the M60's 80 percent OpenCL lead is real and recorded. Everything else in the data favors the newer card.