NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is close. The NVIDIA Tesla K20c scores 11,479, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 scores 11,299. That gives the Tesla K20c a 1.6% lead, a narrow margin that puts both cards in the same performance tier for compute workloads.

The Tesla K20c sits at the 51st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the GTX 760 sits at the 46th percentile. That five-point gap in percentile ranking is larger than the raw score difference might suggest, because the Tesla K20c is positioned against stronger competition.

The Tesla K20c's nearest rivals are a cluster of cards scoring between 11,261 and 11,680. It trails the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M by just 0.4%, the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT by 1.3%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 by 1.7%. It beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M by 1.9%. This places the Tesla K20c in a tightly packed band where a few percentage points separate several architectures.

The GTX 760's nearest rivals tell a different story. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 9,458, which is dragged down by its Geekbench Metal result of 4,524 and its Vulkan result of 12,551. The GTX 760 sits almost exactly level with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK, trailing by just 0.2%. It leads the AMD Radeon R7 M380 by 1.6%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M by 1.7%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 by 1.8%.

The head-to-head comparison is a single data point: OpenCL. There, the Tesla K20c wins. The GTX 760 has no head-to-head victory in the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla K20c wins the only direct comparison available: Geekbench OpenCL. That makes it the stronger choice for general-purpose compute tasks that rely on OpenCL acceleration. Its 11,479 score in that test is above the average of its nearest rivals, all of which fall within a 1.7% range of its result. The Tesla K20c's 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput gives it a theoretical compute advantage that the benchmark result supports.

The GTX 760, despite losing the OpenCL comparison, has a different strength profile. Its Vulkan score of 12,551 is the highest single benchmark result recorded for either card. This suggests that the GTX 760 is better suited for graphics-oriented workloads that use the Vulkan API. Its Metal score of 4,524 is lower than its OpenCL score, which indicates that its performance is API-dependent. The GTX 760 also has display outputs, while the Tesla K20c has none, which makes the GTX 760 the only one of the two that can drive a monitor.

For users focused purely on raw compute in a server or workstation context, the Tesla K20c wins. For users who need a card that can handle modern graphics APIs and output video, the GTX 760 holds the advantage despite its lower average benchmark score.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture and use a 28 nm process at TSMC. The similarity ends there. The Tesla K20c uses the GK110 chip, which is the larger and more capable silicon. The GTX 760 uses the GK104 chip, which is the smaller consumer-oriented die.

The transistor counts reflect the scale difference. The Tesla K20c packs 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The GTX 760 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, or 12.0M per mm². The Tesla K20c has roughly twice the silicon area and double the transistor budget, and that shows up in its wider layout.

The shader configuration is where the gap becomes obvious. The Tesla K20c has 2,496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 40 render output units. The GTX 760 has 1,152 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Tesla K20c has more than double the shading units and more than double the texture mapping units. The render output gap is smaller at 40 versus 32, but it still favors the Tesla K20c.

Compute rates follow that pattern. The Tesla K20c delivers 3.524 TFLOPS FP32, 146.8 GTexel/s of texture fill, and 36.71 GPixel/s of pixel fill. The GTX 760 delivers 2.378 TFLOPS FP32, 99.07 GTexel/s, and 24.77 GPixel/s. The Tesla K20c is about 48% ahead in FP32, about 48% ahead in texture rate, and about 48% ahead in pixel rate. The two cards are in the same architectural family, but the GK110 is a different class of processor.

Specification Differences

The memory systems differ substantially. The Tesla K20c has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 760 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 192.3 GB/s. The Tesla K20c has more capacity and slightly more bandwidth.

Memory clocks also differ. The Tesla K20c runs its memory at 1300 MHz, which translates to 5.2 Gbps effective. The GTX 760 runs its memory at 1502 MHz, or 6 Gbps effective. The GTX 760 has the faster memory speed, but the Tesla K20c's wider bus overcomes that for a bandwidth advantage.

Clock speeds are only listed for the GTX 760. It has a base clock of 980 MHz and a boost clock of 1032 MHz. The Tesla K20c does not have a recorded base or boost clock in the data.

The power and cooling configurations are different. The Tesla K20c has a TDP of 225 W, while the GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W. The Tesla K20c requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and the GTX 760 requires two 6-pin connectors. The suggested power supply is 550 W for the Tesla K20c and 450 W for the GTX 760.

The bus interface is a notable difference. The Tesla K20c uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the GTX 760 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The GTX 760 also has display outputs: 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The Tesla K20c has no display outputs at all, which is typical for a compute-oriented card.

Physical dimensions differ as well. The Tesla K20c is 267 mm long, or 10.5 inches. The GTX 760 is 241 mm long, or 9.5 inches. Both are dual-slot cards.

The Tesla K20c was released on November 11, 2012, with a launch MSRP of 3,199 USD. The GTX 760 was released on June 24, 2013, with a launch MSRP of 249 USD. Both are marked as end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20c, which scores 11,479 versus the GTX 760's 11,299 in the Geekbench OpenCL test, a 1.6% difference.

Q: Does the GTX 760 have any benchmark where it wins?

A: The database records a Vulkan score of 12,551 for the GTX 760, which is its highest recorded score, and a Metal score of 4,524. The Tesla K20c has only an OpenCL result recorded.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Tesla K20c has a 320-bit bus and 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the GTX 760 has a 256-bit bus and 192.3 GB/s. The Tesla K20c is ahead in bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Tesla K20c has 2,496 shading units, while the GTX 760 has 1,152. The Tesla K20c has more than double the shading units.

Q: Can either card display video output?

A: The GTX 760 has 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Tesla K20c has no display outputs.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Tesla K20c has a TDP of 225 W, while the GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W. The Tesla K20c needs a 550 W power supply, while the GTX 760 needs a 450 W supply.

The Verdict

The data leads to a specific conclusion: the choice depends on the workload. For OpenCL compute performance, the Tesla K20c is the pick. It wins the head-to-head, has more shading units, more texture units, more memory capacity, and higher bandwidth. Its 51st percentile ranking and its 1.6% lead over the GTX 760 in the only shared benchmark make it the stronger compute card.

The GTX 760 is the pick for graphics. It has display outputs, a higher Vulkan score, and a faster memory clock. It also has a lower TDP at 170 W and a shorter card length at 241 mm, which makes it easier to fit into a standard system. The GTX 760's nearest rival is the GTX TITAN BLACK, and it sits level with that much larger card, which indicates the GTX 760 is well balanced for its class.

For a user building a system that needs compute acceleration and does not require video output, the Tesla K20c's larger GPU and wider memory bus are the decisive factors. For a user who needs a card that can drive a monitor and handle Vulkan-based graphics, the GTX 760 is the better fit. The data does not support one card being universally better; it supports each card being better in its intended role.