AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 vs NVIDIA Tesla M60 Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 vs NVIDIA Tesla M60

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and NVIDIA Tesla M60 represent two very different approaches to graphics processing, separated by roughly two years of design philosophy. The database shows the Vega 56 sitting at the 81st percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 37,507, while the Tesla M60 lands at the 75th percentile with an average score of 30,490. That gap of 7,017 points, roughly 23% in favor of the AMD part, tells only part of the story. The two cards target entirely different workloads, and their benchmark portfolios barely overlap, making direct comparisons a matter of interpreting what each score represents rather than simple head-to-head competition.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two cards. Instead, each has its own set of recorded tests. The Vega 56 was evaluated in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) and Geekbench Metal, scoring 1,501 and 73,512 respectively. The Tesla M60 was tested in Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, producing scores of 29,506 and 31,473. These tests measure different APIs and different rendering paths, so a raw comparison requires caution. However, the average benchmark score provides a useful normalization. The Vega 56's average of 37,507 places it 23.0% above the Tesla M60's 30,490 average.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database adds context. The Vega 56 sits within a tight cluster: NVIDIA Tesla P4 averages 37,628 (0.3% higher), GeForce RTX 4070 averages 37,648 (0.4% higher), Radeon PRO W6400 averages 37,157 (0.9% lower), and RTX 4080 Mobile averages 38,135 (1.6% higher). This means the Vega 56 is effectively surrounded by cards that all perform within a 2.6% band. The Tesla M60, meanwhile, sits in a similar tight grouping: NVIDIA CMP 70HX averages 30,476 (statistically tied), Radeon RX 6700 averages 30,433 (0.2% higher), Radeon RX 6800 averages 30,095 (1.3% lower), and RTX 3070 Ti averages 29,945 (1.8% lower). The Tesla M60's nearest rivals are all within a 2.0% range.

The interesting implication is that both cards occupy positions in dense performance clusters, but those clusters are separated by a substantial margin. The Vega 56's percentile ranking at 81 versus the Tesla M60's 75 reflects this separation. In practical terms, the Vega 56 delivers roughly a quarter more average compute throughput than the Tesla M60, though the architectural priorities differ so significantly that this number should not be read as universal superiority.

Where Each One Wins

The Vega 56 demonstrates clear advantages in scenarios that stress raw pixel throughput and texture processing. Its pixel rate of 94.14 GPixel/s compared to the Tesla M60's 75.39 GPixel/s represents a 24.9% advantage. Texture rate shows an even larger gap: 329.5 GTexel/s versus 150.8 GTexel/s, a 118.5% difference. These figures indicate that the Vega 56 can fill geometry and apply textures at more than double the rate of the Tesla M60, making it better suited for real-time rendering workloads where rasterization dominates.

Floating-point performance follows a similar pattern. The Vega 56 achieves 10.54 TFLOPS in FP32, while the Tesla M60 manages 4.825 TFLOPS. That is a 118.4% advantage for AMD. Additionally, the Vega 56 supports FP16 at 21.09 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the Tesla M60 lacks entirely. This makes the Vega 56 substantially more capable for compute tasks that can leverage reduced precision.

The Tesla M60, however, wins in areas that matter for its intended datacenter role. Its memory configuration, while lower in bandwidth, uses GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus. The Vega 56 uses HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, giving it 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth versus the Tesla M60's 160.4 GB/s. That is a 155.4% bandwidth advantage for AMD. But the Tesla M60's architecture is optimized for virtualization and multi-tenant workloads, with no display outputs, which means it can be deployed headless in servers without consuming resources on video output. The Vega 56 includes 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a consumer-oriented card.

The Tesla M60 also shows a higher Vulkan API version in the database (1.4 versus 1.3), though both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The Tesla M60's power draw is higher at 300 W versus 210 W, and it requires a 700 W suggested PSU versus 550 W for the Vega 56. This suggests the Tesla M60 is designed for server chassis where power delivery is less constrained, while the Vega 56 targets desktop builds.

Architecture Differences

The Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. The die measures 495 mm² and contains 12,500 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 25.3 million per mm². This is a large, dense chip designed for high throughput. The Tesla M60 uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. Its die is smaller at 398 mm² and contains 5,200 million transistors, giving a density of 13.1 million per mm². The process node difference explains much of the transistor density gap: 14 nm allows nearly double the density of 28 nm.

Shader resources differ dramatically. The Vega 56 has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Tesla M60 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Vega 56 therefore has 75% more shaders and 75% more TMUs, while ROP count is identical. Clock speeds also favor AMD: the Vega 56 runs at 1156 MHz base and 1471 MHz boost, while the Tesla M60 runs at 557 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost. The base clock gap is particularly striking, with AMD running more than double the NVIDIA base frequency.

Memory architecture represents a fundamental divergence. The Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, achieving 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla M60 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 160.4 GB/s. HBM2's stacked design allows the wide bus and high bandwidth, but it also contributes to the Vega 56's larger die and higher transistor count. The Tesla M60's memory clock is listed at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective, versus 800 MHz with 1600 Mbps effective for the Vega 56, but the bus width difference overwhelms the clock advantage.

Power characteristics also differ. The Vega 56 has a 210 W TDP and uses 2x 8-pin power connectors. The Tesla M60 has a 300 W TDP and uses a single 8-pin connector. This is notable: the Tesla M60 draws 42.9% more power yet delivers less compute, indicating that its Maxwell architecture, while efficient for its time, cannot match the throughput-per-watt of the newer GCN 5.0 design. The physical dimensions also differ: the Vega 56 measures 280 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, while the Tesla M60 measures 267 mm in length with no recorded height or width. Both are dual-slot cards.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 has an average benchmark score of 37,507, which is 23.0% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla M60's average of 30,490.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Vega 56 achieves 409.6 GB/s using HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, while the Tesla M60 achieves 160.4 GB/s using GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The Vega 56 has 155.4% more bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The Vega 56 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the Tesla M60 supports Vulkan 1.4. The Vega 56 also supports FP16 compute, which the Tesla M60 does not.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Vega 56 has a 210 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU. The Tesla M60 has a 300 W TDP and suggests a 700 W PSU. The Tesla M60 draws more power but delivers less compute throughput.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: Only the Vega 56 has display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Tesla M60 has no display outputs, making it a headless compute card.

Q: How do the cards compare in pixel and texture rates?

A: The Vega 56 achieves 94.14 GPixel/s and 329.5 GTexel/s. The Tesla M60 achieves 75.39 GPixel/s and 150.8 GTexel/s. The Vega 56 leads by 24.9% in pixel rate and 118.5% in texture rate.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Vega 56 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the Tesla M60 uses 28 nm from TSMC. Transistor counts are 12,500 million versus 5,200 million, and die sizes are 495 mm² versus 398 mm². The Vega 56's transistor density of 25.3 million per mm² far exceeds the Tesla M60's 13.1 million per mm².

Clock speeds show the Vega 56 at 1156 MHz base and 1471 MHz boost, compared to 557 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost for the Tesla M60. Memory clocks are 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) for the Vega 56 versus 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the Tesla M60. Memory type differs: HBM2 versus GDDR5, with bus widths of 2048 bit versus 256 bit.

Compute resources: the Vega 56 has 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, delivering 10.54 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.09 TFLOPS FP16. The Tesla M60 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, delivering 4.825 TFLOPS FP32 with no FP16 support. Pixel rates are 94.14 GPixel/s versus 75.39 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 329.5 GTexel/s versus 150.8 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specs: TDP is 210 W versus 300 W, power connectors are 2x 8-pin versus 1x 8-pin, suggested PSU is 550 W versus 700 W. The Vega 56 is 280 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide; the Tesla M60 is 267 mm long with no recorded height or width. The Vega 56 has display outputs; the Tesla M60 has none. Release dates are August 2017 for the Vega 56 and August 2015 for the Tesla M60. The Vega 56's launch MSRP was 399 USD; the Tesla M60 has no recorded launch MSRP. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy: the Vega 56 outperforms the Tesla M60 in raw compute, memory bandwidth, pixel throughput, and texture throughput. Its average benchmark score is 23.0% higher, and its percentile ranking is 6 points higher. For anyone running real-time graphics, machine learning inference on FP16, or compute workloads that benefit from high bandwidth, the Vega 56 is the stronger choice.

The Tesla M60, however, occupies a different niche. With no display outputs, it is designed for server deployments where remote rendering or virtualized GPU workloads are the priority. Its Maxwell architecture, while older, has a proven track record in datacenter environments. The Vulkan 1.4 support is a minor advantage, and its smaller physical footprint (267 mm versus 280 mm) may fit certain chassis configurations more easily.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward. For compute-heavy tasks, rendering, or any workload where clock speed and bandwidth matter, the Vega 56 wins decisively. For headless server deployments where display output is unnecessary and the card will be managed remotely, the Tesla M60 remains a viable option, but it sacrifices significant performance to serve that role. The 23% average score gap, combined with the Vega 56's 118.4% FP32 advantage and 155.4% bandwidth advantage, means the AMD card is the superior processor in almost every measurable dimension. The Tesla M60's only clear wins are its higher Vulkan version and its headless form factor, neither of which compensates for the performance deficit.