NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if narrow, separation between these two end-of-life NVIDIA workstation and consumer cards. The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is the unequivocal winner in raw compute throughput, outperforming the GeForce GTX 480 by 22.7% in the sole head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL benchmark (17215 vs 13300). However, the GTX 480 holds a higher percentile ranking (53rd vs 52nd) and a superior average benchmark score (13300 vs 12625) when considering all of its benchmark results. This paradox is explained by the fact that the Tesla K20Xm’s average is dragged down by its weaker Geekbench Metal score of 8035, a test that the GTX 480 did not run. For a user strictly focused on OpenCL compute, the Tesla K20Xm is the data-backed choice. For a user needing a display output or a more balanced overall benchmark profile, the GTX 480 is the better pick despite its age. The verdict is not about gaming; it is about compute workloads and interface requirements.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent distinct architectural generations from NVIDIA. The GeForce GTX 480 is built on the Fermi architecture, using the GF100 chip fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The Tesla K20Xm is a Kepler-generation part, using the GK110 chip on a more advanced 28 nm process. This process shrink is reflected in the transistor density: the K20Xm packs 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter, more than double the GTX 480’s 5.9 million per square millimeter. Total transistor counts also diverge sharply, with the K20Xm housing 7,080 million transistors versus 3,100 million on the GTX 480, despite a similar die size of 561 mm² vs 529 mm².

The execution resources differ significantly. The Tesla K20Xm has 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The GTX 480 has 480 shading units, 60 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. This translates to a massive theoretical throughput advantage for the K20Xm: it delivers 3.935 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and a texture rate of 164.0 GTexel/s, versus the GTX 480’s 1,345.0 GFLOPS and 42.06 GTexel/s. The pixel rates also favor the K20Xm (40.99 GPixel/s vs 21.03 GPixel/s). The memory subsystems are similarly generational. The K20Xm has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, achieving 249.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the GTX 480 has 1536 MB of GDDR5 on the same 384-bit bus, but only reaches 177.4 GB/s. The K20Xm’s memory clock is 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) versus the GTX 480’s 924 MHz (3.7 Gbps effective).

Interface and output capabilities are another major divergence. The GTX 480 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 and has display outputs (2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a). The K20Xm uses the newer PCIe 3.0 x16 bus but has no display outputs, indicating its compute-only orientation. Power requirements are similar in absolute terms: the GTX 480 has a 250 W TDP and suggests a 600 W PSU, while the K20Xm has a 235 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU. Both are dual-slot cards with a length of 267 mm (10.5 inches). The GTX 480 requires 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, while the K20Xm’s connector configuration is not specified in the data.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on benchmark results, the Tesla K20Xm wins the only direct comparison available. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 17215 versus the GTX 480’s 13300, a margin of 22.7%. This indicates that for compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL, the K20Xm is substantially faster. The K20Xm’s advantage is consistent with its much higher shading unit count and memory bandwidth.

The GeForce GTX 480, however, wins on the basis of its average benchmark score when all tests are considered. Its average score of 13300 is higher than the K20Xm’s average of 12625. This is because the K20Xm’s OpenCL score is offset by its Geekbench Metal score of 8035, which is significantly lower. The GTX 480 does not have a Metal benchmark result in the data, so its average is based solely on its OpenCL performance. In terms of percentile rank, the GTX 480 sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, slightly above the K20Xm’s 52nd percentile. This suggests that in a broader context, the GTX 480’s single benchmark places it marginally higher relative to the entire GPU landscape.

The GTX 480 also wins on practical usability for a desktop workstation: it has display outputs, whereas the K20Xm has none. The data shows the GTX 480 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, and the K20Xm supports the same DirectX and OpenGL versions, plus Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 480 does not list Vulkan support. For a user who needs to drive a monitor, the GTX 480 is the only choice. For a headless compute node, the K20Xm is the performance winner.

FAQ

Q: Which card performs better in OpenCL compute?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm is the clear winner. In the Geekbench OpenCL head-to-head, it scores 17215, which is 22.7% higher than the GeForce GTX 480’s score of 13300.

Q: Why does the GeForce GTX 480 have a higher average benchmark score than the Tesla K20Xm?

A: The GTX 480 has an average benchmark score of 13300, while the K20Xm averages 12625. This is because the K20Xm’s average includes a Geekbench Metal score of 8035, which is much lower than its OpenCL score, while the GTX 480’s average is based only on its OpenCL result.

Q: Can the Tesla K20Xm be used to connect a display?

A: No. The data lists the Tesla K20Xm as having no display outputs. In contrast, the GeForce GTX 480 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a outputs.

Q: How do their memory capacities and bandwidths compare?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory with 249.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce GTX 480 has 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory with 177.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Both use a 384-bit memory bus.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has a transistor density of 12.6M per square millimeter, fabricated on a 28 nm process. The GeForce GTX 480 has a density of 5.9M per square millimeter on a 40 nm process.

Q: What are the power supply requirements for each card?

A: The GeForce GTX 480 has a TDP of 250 W and suggests a 600 W PSU. The Tesla K20Xm has a TDP of 235 W and suggests a 550 W PSU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test. This single result is decisive in favor of the Tesla K20Xm. The K20Xm achieves a score of 17215, while the GeForce GTX 480 scores 13300. The delta percentage is -22.7%, which is calculated from the perspective of the GTX 480 being slower. This is a substantial performance gap, indicating that the K20Xm delivers roughly 29% more performance in this specific test (17215 / 13300 ≈ 1.294). The K20Xm’s advantage is likely rooted in its architectural superiority: it has 2,688 shading units versus 480, a texture rate of 164.0 GTexel/s versus 42.06 GTexel/s, and a memory bandwidth of 249.6 GB/s versus 177.4 GB/s. The GTX 480’s only counterpoints are its higher percentile rank (53 vs 52) and its higher average score (13300 vs 12625), which are artifacts of the K20Xm’s inclusion of a weaker Metal benchmark result.

The data does not include any other head-to-head tests, so the analysis is limited to this single OpenCL data point. The K20Xm’s win is unambiguous, but it does not tell the full story of each card’s capabilities. The GTX 480’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (scoring 13321, a -0.2% delta), the AMD FirePro M6100 (13354, -0.4%), and the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (13356, -0.4%). These are all extremely close to the GTX 480’s score, indicating that the GTX 480 is competitive with a specific tier of mobile and workstation GPUs. The K20Xm’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT (12710, -0.7%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12773, -1.2%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12830, -1.6%). These rivals are all below the K20Xm’s average score, but the deltas are small.

In summary, the head-to-head data shows a clear performance hierarchy: the Tesla K20Xm is the faster compute card by a wide margin in OpenCL. The GeForce GTX 480, however, holds its own as a legacy product with a better overall percentile standing and the practical benefit of display outputs. For any workload that can use OpenCL and does not require a monitor, the K20Xm is the data-driven choice. For a system that needs graphics output or a more balanced benchmark profile, the GTX 480 is the only option that satisfies those requirements.