NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 vs NVIDIA Tesla K10 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 vs NVIDIA Tesla K10

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 and NVIDIA Tesla K10 are two Kepler-generation cards built on the same GK104 chip, yet they serve fundamentally different purposes. The GTX 680 is a consumer gaming flagship, while the Tesla K10 is a dual-GPU compute accelerator aimed at professional workloads. Benchmark data shows the GTX 680 holds a 0.9% lead in average benchmark score (14150 vs 14029), placing both cards at the 55th percentile among all GPUs. The single head-to-head result available, Geekbench OpenCL, shows the GTX 680 winning by 20.5%, but the Tesla K10 counters with double the memory capacity and a much higher launch MSRP, reflecting its compute-oriented positioning rather than raw graphics throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 680 wins the only direct benchmark comparison available. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 680 scores 16906 against the Tesla K10’s 14029, a 20.5% margin. This advantage stems from higher clock speeds and a more aggressive memory configuration tuned for consumer workloads. The GTX 680 also shows broader benchmark coverage with three results (Geekbench Metal at 7897, OpenCL at 16906, and Vulkan at 17646), while the Tesla K10 has only one recorded OpenCL score. For users running graphics APIs like Metal or Vulkan, the GTX 680 is the only option with measurable data—the Tesla K10 has no display outputs and is not designed for such workloads.

The Tesla K10 wins on memory capacity, offering 4 GB versus the GTX 680’s 2 GB. Both use GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but the K10’s larger frame buffer suits compute tasks that require holding large datasets. The K10 also carries a higher TDP at 225 W versus 195 W, suggesting it is built for sustained compute loads rather than power-efficient gaming. The GTX 680 counters with higher memory bandwidth (192.3 GB/s vs 160.0 GB/s) and faster effective memory speed (6 Gbps vs 5 Gbps), which benefits texture-heavy graphics work. In short, the GTX 680 wins on raw speed and API support; the Tesla K10 wins on capacity and compute-oriented design.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the GK104 chip, Kepler architecture, 28 nm process, TSMC foundry, 3,540 million transistors, and a 294 mm² die size. The shading unit count is identical at 1536, as are the texture mapping units (128) and render output units (32). Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores. The critical differences lie in clock behavior, memory configuration, and physical design. The GTX 680 lists base and boost clocks of 1006 MHz and 1058 MHz respectively, while the Tesla K10 has no listed base or boost clocks—indicating a different power management strategy for compute environments. The GTX 680’s memory runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the K10’s runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

The Tesla K10’s dual-GPU nature is evident in its specifications, though the fact pack does not explicitly state the number of GPUs. The 4 GB memory total, combined with the same 256-bit bus width as the GTX 680, suggests two 2 GB memory pools per GPU. The K10’s lower pixel rate (23.84 GPixel/s vs 33.86 GPixel/s) and texture rate (95.36 GTexel/s vs 135.4 GTexel/s) reflect its lower effective clocks. The K10 has no display outputs, while the GTX 680 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. Both cards use PCIe 3.0 x16 and support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 680 scores 16906 against the Tesla K10’s 14029. That 20.5% delta is substantial and aligns with the GTX 680’s higher FP32 throughput of 3.250 TFLOPS versus the K10’s 2.289 TFLOPS. The GTX 680 also achieves a higher pixel rate (33.86 GPixel/s vs 23.84 GPixel/s) and texture rate (135.4 GTexel/s vs 95.36 GTexel/s), all driven by the clock speed advantage. In real terms, the GTX 680 processes nearly 42% more pixels per second and 42% more texels per second than the K10.

However, the Tesla K10’s average benchmark score of 14029 is only 0.9% behind the GTX 680’s 14150, despite losing the OpenCL test by 20.5%. This discrepancy suggests that the K10’s second GPU contributes to compute workloads in ways not captured by the single OpenCL test, or that the GTX 680’s additional benchmarks (Metal, Vulkan) skew its average upward. The GTX 680’s Vulkan score of 17646 is its highest, while its Metal score of 7897 is its lowest—the latter likely dragging its average down. The Tesla K10, with only one benchmark, has an average equal to that single score.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 680 has a higher average benchmark score of 14150, compared to the Tesla K10’s 14029. This represents a 0.9% advantage for the GTX 680.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 680 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The GTX 680 scores 16906 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 20.5% higher than the Tesla K10’s 14029.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Tesla K10 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the GTX 680’s 2 GB. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the GTX 680 has higher bandwidth at 192.3 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. However, the GTX 680 has display outputs while the Tesla K10 has none.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference?

A: The GTX 680 has a pixel rate of 33.86 GPixel/s, while the Tesla K10 achieves 23.84 GPixel/s—a 42% advantage for the GTX 680.

Q: Which card has a higher TDP?

A: The Tesla K10 has a higher TDP of 225 W, compared to the GTX 680’s 195 W. The K10 also requires a larger suggested PSU of 550 W versus 450 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 | NVIDIA Tesla K10 |

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

| Generation | GeForce 600 | Tesla Kepler (Kxx) |

| Base Clock | 1006 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1058 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.3 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 33.86 GPixel/s | 23.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 135.4 GTexel/s | 95.36 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.250 TFLOPS | 2.289 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 195 W | 225 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 550 W |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |

| Dimensions (Length) | 256 mm (10.1 inches) | 272 mm (10.7 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | Not listed |

| Width | 38 mm (1.5 inches) | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2012-03-21 | 2012-04-30 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 500 | Tesla Fermi |

| Successor | GeForce 700 | Tesla Maxwell |

| Launch MSRP | 499 USD | 5,099 USD |

| Geekbench OpenCL Score | 16906 | 14029 |

| Geekbench Metal Score | 7897 | Not available |

| Geekbench Vulkan Score | 17646 | Not available |

| Average Benchmark Score | 14150 | 14029 |