AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in their average benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has an average benchmark score of 12,625, while the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT records an average of 11,627. This places the K20Xm about 8.6% higher in aggregate performance across all recorded tests.

Q: Which GPU has better OpenCL performance, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT wins the direct head-to-head OpenCL test with a score of 18,290 versus the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm’s 17,215. The delta is 5.9% in favor of the AMD card.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU among all GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm sits at the 52nd percentile, while the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is at the 51st percentile. Despite the K20Xm’s higher average score, both cards are nearly identical in overall standing.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare for each card?

A: For the K20Xm, the closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT with an average score of 12,710 (0.7% higher). For the RX 7800 XT, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is nearest at 11,680 (0.5% higher).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 249.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7800 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is currently in production?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is listed as end-of-life, while the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is marked as active production.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK110 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 5 nm node. This process difference is stark: the K20Xm packs 7,080 million transistors across a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The RX 7800 XT integrates 28,100 million transistors on a much smaller 346 mm² die, achieving 81.2 million transistors per mm² — over six times the density.

The memory subsystems diverge fundamentally. The K20Xm uses 6 GB of GDDR5 with a 384-bit interface and 249.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7800 XT uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but its 624.1 GB/s bandwidth is more than double. The newer card also supports PCIe 4.0 x16 versus the K20Xm’s PCIe 3.0 x16.

Compute resources differ substantially. The K20Xm has 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The RX 7800 XT has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs — double the ROP count. The AMD card also includes 60 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Kepler-based NVIDIA part. The RX 7800 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the K20Xm is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: 1.2.175 for NVIDIA versus 1.4 for AMD.

Clock behavior highlights another contrast. The K20Xm lists no base or boost clock in the data; only memory clock at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). The RX 7800 XT has a base clock of 1295 MHz, a game clock of 2124 MHz, and a boost clock of 2430 MHz, with memory at 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one direct head-to-head benchmark exists in the data: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT scores 18,290 against the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm’s 17,215, a 5.9% advantage for the AMD card. This is a modest win, not a landslide, and it reflects a single compute-oriented workload rather than a comprehensive suite.

Looking at the broader benchmark sets, the K20Xm has two entries: Geekbench Metal at 8,035 and Geekbench OpenCL at 17,215, producing an average of 12,625. The RX 7800 XT has ten entries, including a strong Geekbench Vulkan score of 54,228, PassMark G3D at 24,176, and PassMark GPU Compute at 13,473. The RX 7800 XT also records 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 4,157. The K20Xm lacks Vulkan and 3DMark results entirely, so the comparison is inherently lopsided.

The average scores tell a nuanced story: the K20Xm’s average is 12,625, which is 8.6% higher than the RX 7800 XT’s 11,627. However, this average is drawn from only two tests for NVIDIA versus ten for AMD. The RX 7800 XT’s average is dragged down by low legacy DirectX scores (PassMark DX9 at 304, DX11 at 249, DX10 at 121, DX12 at 93), which are likely not representative of modern workloads.

The percentile data reinforces the closeness: both are within one percentile point (52 vs. 51). The K20Xm’s nearest rival, the RX 7600M XT, is only 0.7% faster on average, while the RX 7800 XT’s nearest rival, the GTX 1660, is 0.5% faster. The K20Xm also edges out the Tesla K20c (a near-identical sibling) by 1.3% in the RX 7800 XT’s rival list.

The Verdict

The data presents a split verdict. In raw aggregate scores, the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm holds a narrow edge with an 8.6% higher average benchmark score. However, the RX 7800 XT wins the only true head-to-head test (OpenCL) by 5.9%. The percentile rankings are effectively tied at 52 versus 51.

For legacy compute tasks and environments where Kepler-era software optimizations remain relevant, the K20Xm’s higher average score suggests it still holds ground. Its 6 GB of GDDR5 and 249.6 GB/s bandwidth, while dated, are sufficient for many older professional workloads. The card carries a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD, indicating its original workstation-class positioning.

For modern applications, the RX 7800 XT is the more capable hardware. It offers 16 GB of GDDR6 with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, 60 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and Vulkan 1.4. Its FP32 throughput of 37.32 TFLOPS dwarfs the K20Xm’s 3.935 TFLOPS by nearly an order of magnitude. The RX 7800 XT also has a superior texture rate (583.2 GTexel/s vs. 164.0 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (233.3 GPixel/s vs. 40.99 GPixel/s).

The K20Xm’s production status is end-of-life, while the RX 7800 XT remains active. The AMD card also draws slightly more power (263 W vs. 235 W) and requires a 600 W PSU versus 550 W, but these are minor trade-offs for the substantial feature and throughput advantages.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The Tesla K20Xm uses 28 nm process technology; the RX 7800 XT uses 5 nm. Transistor count jumps from 7,080 million to 28,100 million, while die size shrinks from 561 mm² to 346 mm². Transistor density improves from 12.6M/mm² to 81.2M/mm².

Memory capacity quadruples from 6 GB to 16 GB, and type advances from GDDR5 to GDDR6. Bus width narrows from 384-bit to 256-bit, but bandwidth climbs from 249.6 GB/s to 624.1 GB/s. Shading units increase from 2,688 to 3,840, TMUs from 224 to 240, and ROPs from 48 to 96. The RX 7800 XT adds 60 RT cores; the K20Xm has none.

Clocks differ markedly: the K20Xm has no listed base or boost clock, while the RX 7800 XT lists 1295 MHz base, 2124 MHz game, and 2430 MHz boost. Memory clock rises from 1300 MHz to 2438 MHz. FP32 performance jumps from 3.935 TFLOPS to 37.32 TFLOPS, and the RX 7800 XT also offers FP16 at 37.32 TFLOPS (1:1), which the K20Xm lacks.

TDP increases from 235 W to 263 W, and suggested PSU from 550 W to 600 W. The K20Xm has no display outputs; the RX 7800 XT has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. Bus interface advances from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 4.0 x16. DirectX support improves from 12 (11_0) to 12 Ultimate (12_2), and Vulkan from 1.2.175 to 1.4. The RX 7800 XT also has specified dimensions (267 mm length, 111 mm height, 50 mm width), while the K20Xm lists only length.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm wins in aggregate average benchmark score (12,625 vs. 11,627) and in percentile ranking (52 vs. 51). It also has a lower TDP (235 W vs. 263 W) and a lower suggested PSU requirement (550 W vs. 600 W). For scenarios where the benchmark suite is limited to OpenCL and Metal, the K20Xm’s average holds up well against its nearest rivals, trailing the RX 7600M XT by only 0.7%.

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT wins the sole direct head-to-head test (OpenCL by 5.9%) and dominates in every throughput metric: FP32 is 37.32 TFLOPS versus 3.935 TFLOPS, texture rate is 583.2 GTexel/s versus 164.0 GTexel/s, and pixel rate is 233.3 GPixel/s versus 40.99 GPixel/s. It offers 16 GB of memory versus 6 GB, over double the bandwidth (624.1 GB/s vs. 249.6 GB/s), and adds ray tracing support. It also has modern API compatibility including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

Use-case guidance follows the data. The K20Xm suits legacy compute pipelines where Kepler-era drivers and OpenCL/Metal workloads are the norm, and where lower power draw matters. The RX 7800 XT is the choice for newer rendering workloads, ray-traced content, high-resolution texturing, and any application that can leverage its massive FP32 and FP16 throughput. The RX 7800 XT’s active production status and display outputs make it viable for consumer-facing uses, while the K20Xm’s lack of display outputs confines it to headless compute roles.