NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 vs NVIDIA Tesla K10 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single head-to-head benchmark between the NVIDIA Tesla K10 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590: the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Tesla K10 scores 14,029 points, while the GTX 590 scores 12,830 points. This gives the Tesla K10 a decisive 9.3% advantage in compute throughput, a notable margin for two GPUs from adjacent generations. The delta of 9.3% represents the only recorded comparison, and the Tesla K10 takes the sole win in this matchup.

Context from the nearest rivals clarifies the positioning. The Tesla K10 sits within a tight cluster of competitors: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 scores 14,150 (0.9% ahead of the K10), the AMD Radeon RX 570X scores 13,871 (1.1% behind), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 13,821 (1.5% behind), and the AMD Radeon 660M scores 13,812 (1.6% behind). The K10's percentile rank among all GPUs is 55, placing it just above the midpoint of the database. Meanwhile, the GTX 590's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 455 at exactly 12,831 (a 0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5100 at 12,847 (0.1% ahead of the 590), the AMD Radeon 740M at 12,870 (0.3% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 at 12,773 (0.4% behind). The GTX 590's percentile rank is 52, three points lower than the K10's.

Interpreting these numbers, the Tesla K10 does not merely edge out the GTX 590; it also lands in a slightly higher competitive tier. The K10's 14,029 score is within 1% of the GTX 680, a strong result for a card aimed at professional compute. The GTX 590, by contrast, trades blows with mid-range mobile and workstation parts like the Radeon Pro 455 and Radeon 740M, indicating that its compute performance has aged less gracefully. The 9.3% gap in OpenCL is substantial enough to matter in workloads that scale with raw FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the K10 in the specification data.

No other benchmark results exist in the database for either card, so the head-to-head analysis rests entirely on this OpenCL measurement. Still, the direction is clear: the newer Kepler architecture delivers a meaningful compute uplift over the older Fermi 2.0 design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K10 scores 14,029 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 scores 12,830 points. The K10 leads by 9.3%.

Q: How does the Tesla K10 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The K10 is 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 (14,150), 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 570X (13,871), 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (13,821), and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon 660M (13,812). Its overall percentile rank is 55.

Q: What is the GTX 590's competitive position?

A: The GTX 590 is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831, 0% delta), trails the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847) and AMD Radeon 740M (12,870) by 0.1% and 0.3% respectively, and leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773) by 0.4%. Its percentile rank is 52.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The Tesla K10 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 590 has 1536 MB (1.5 GB) of GDDR5 memory. The K10 also uses a 256-bit bus versus the 590's 384-bit bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Tesla K10 has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W power supply, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector. The GTX 590 has a TDP of 365 W, requires a 750 W power supply, and uses two 8-pin connectors.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Tesla K10 adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the GTX 590 has no Vulkan support recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The Tesla K10 and GTX 590 represent two distinct NVIDIA architectures separated by a full process generation. The K10 uses the GK104 chip built on Kepler architecture and a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the GTX 590 uses the GF110 chip built on Fermi 2.0 architecture and a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts tell an interesting story: the K10 packs 3,540 million transistors onto a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The GTX 590, by contrast, has 3,000 million transistors spread across a much larger 520 mm² die, for a density of just 5.8 million per square millimeter. The Kepler design nearly doubles the density, a direct consequence of the 28 nm node.

The compute resources differ sharply. The K10 fields 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 590 has only 512 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Despite having fewer ROPs, the K10 achieves a higher pixel rate: 23.84 GPixel/s versus 19.46 GPixel/s for the 590. The texture rate gap is even larger, with the K10 delivering 95.36 GTexel/s against the 590's 38.91 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance follows the same pattern: the K10 reaches 2.289 TFLOPS FP32, while the 590 manages 1,244.2 GFLOPS. The K10 has more than 2x the shading units and nearly 2.5x the texture throughput, making it the clear compute leader on paper.

Memory architecture also differs. The K10 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit interface with 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 590 uses 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit interface with 164.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Interestingly, the 590's wider bus gives it a slight bandwidth edge despite the K10's higher memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus the 590's 854 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective). The K10 compensates with larger capacity, which matters for datasets that exceed 1.5 GB.

API support shows another divergence. Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the K10 adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the GTX 590 has no Vulkan support recorded. This makes the K10 more versatile in modern compute and rendering stacks that lean on Vulkan.

The generation labels reflect their positions in NVIDIA's lineup. The K10 belongs to the Tesla Kepler series (Kxx), with the Tesla Fermi as predecessor and Tesla Maxwell as successor. The GTX 590 belongs to the GeForce 500 series, with the GeForce 400 as predecessor and GeForce 600 as successor. The K10 also has no display outputs, while the GTX 590 provides 3x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort, underscoring the K10's compute-only role.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla K10 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |

| Generation | Tesla Kepler (Kxx) | GeForce 500 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 520 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 5.8M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 854 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1536 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 164.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 512 |

| TMUs | 128 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.84 GPixel/s | 19.46 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 95.36 GTexel/s | 38.91 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.289 TFLOPS | 1,244.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 225 W | 365 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 750 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 3x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort |

| Vulkan API | 1.2.175 | null |

| Dimensions | 272 mm length | 279 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width |

| Release Date | 2012-04-30 | 2011-03-23 |

| Launch MSRP | 5,099 USD | 699 USD |

The table highlights the generational shift. The K10 is smaller in die area yet denser, faster in most compute metrics, and significantly more power-efficient, drawing 225 W versus 365 W. The GTX 590 retains advantages in ROP count, memory bus width, and bandwidth, plus it has display outputs and a shorter physical footprint if height and width are considered, though the K10 is slightly shorter in length.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla K10 wins decisively in compute-oriented workloads. Its 2.289 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 95.36 GTexel/s texture rate, and 23.84 GPixel/s pixel rate outclass the GTX 590's 1,244.2 GFLOPS, 38.91 GTexel/s, and 19.46 GPixel/s. The 9.3% OpenCL score advantage confirms that real-world compute tasks align with the theoretical specs. The K10 also wins on efficiency: 225 W TDP versus 365 W, a 550 W suggested PSU versus 750 W, and a single 6-pin plus 8-pin configuration versus dual 8-pins. For multi-GPU or dense server environments, the K10's lower power draw and smaller die size make it the more practical choice. The 4 GB memory capacity also gives it headroom for larger datasets, and Vulkan support extends its software reach.

The GTX 590 wins in a few narrow but meaningful areas. Its 164.0 GB/s memory bandwidth edges out the K10's 160.0 GB/s, which could benefit workloads that are bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound. Its 48 ROPs exceed the K10's 32, which historically aids fill-rate-limited scenarios, though the K10's higher pixel rate complicates that picture. The GTX 590 also has display outputs, making it usable for direct video output, while the K10 has none. For any task requiring a monitor connection or legacy DVI support, the GTX 590 is the only option here. Its PCIe 2.0 interface is older, but its 384-bit bus partially compensates.

The release timeline also matters. The GTX 590 launched on 2011-03-23, over a year before the K10 on 2012-04-30. In a system with PCIe 3.0 support, the K10 benefits from the newer bus standard. The GTX 590's lack of Vulkan support limits its use in modern cross-platform compute frameworks, while the K10's Vulkan 1.2.175 support future-proofs it to some extent.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear verdict for compute buyers: the Tesla K10 is the superior GPU for OpenCL performance, efficiency, and modern API compatibility. Its 14,029 score against 12,830, the 9.3% delta, and the 55th percentile rank all indicate a card that belongs to a slightly higher performance tier. The K10's 2.289 TFLOPS FP32, 95.36 GTexel/s texture rate, and 4 GB memory capacity make it the stronger choice for scientific computing, machine learning inference, or any GPU-accelerated workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan. Its 225 W TDP and 550 W PSU recommendation also make it easier to integrate into existing systems, and the dual-slot form factor with a 272 mm length fits most chassis.

The GTX 590 is the pick only for users who need display outputs or a wider memory bus. Its 384-bit interface and 164.0 GB/s bandwidth are marginally better, and its 48 ROPs could help in specific legacy scenarios. The 365 W TDP and 750 W PSU requirement are heavier burdens, and its 1,244.2 GFLOPS FP32 is roughly half the K10's throughput. The GTX 590's 12,830 OpenCL score and 52nd percentile rank place it in a lower competitive bracket, trading with mobile and workstation parts rather than the K10's desktop-class rivals.

The launch MSRP of 5,099 USD for the K10 versus 699 USD for the GTX 590 reflects their different market positions: the K10 is a professional compute card, the GTX 590 is a consumer enthusiast card. The benchmark data justifies the K10's compute focus, though the GTX 590 remains relevant for its niche. For anyone choosing between the two based strictly on recorded performance, the Tesla K10 wins the only measured benchmark and holds the architectural advantages that matter for compute. The GTX 590's sole merits are its bandwidth, ROP count, display outputs, and lower entry price. Choose the K10 for compute density and efficiency, choose the GTX 590 for legacy display needs and fill-rate-specific tasks.