NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20m Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between these two NVIDIA cards, with each winning one of the two shared benchmark tests. The GeForce RTX 3070 delivers a massive victory in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 112,821 compared to the Tesla K20m's 16,241. That represents an 85.6% advantage for the RTX 3070, a dominant margin that reflects the generational leap in compute performance. In practical terms, the RTX 3070's OpenCL result is nearly seven times higher, which points to a fundamental difference in raw processing capability for general-purpose workloads.

However, the Tesla K20m fights back in Geekbench Vulkan, where it posts 21,936 against the RTX 3070's 21,022. The K20m wins this test by 4.3%, a narrow but meaningful edge. This result is notable because Vulkan is a modern graphics API, and the older Kepler architecture still manages to outperform the newer Ampere chip in this specific workload. The delta is small, but it shows that the K20m is not universally obsolete in every scenario.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the Tesla K20m records an average score of 19,089 across its tests, while the RTX 3070 averages 17,208. The K20m's average sits 0.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, 0.3% above the AMD Radeon RX 6600, and 0.3% above the NVIDIA Quadro K6000, while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 by 0.4%. The RTX 3070's average is 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT, 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7970M, while sitting 1.5% behind the NVIDIA Tesla K40c. These percentile positions place the K20m at the 64th percentile among all GPUs and the RTX 3070 at the 61st percentile, meaning both cards land in the upper-middle tier of the database.

The head-to-head record is one win each, but the magnitude of the RTX 3070's OpenCL victory dwarfs the K20m's narrow Vulkan edge. The data indicates that for compute-heavy tasks, the RTX 3070 is in a different league, while the K20m retains a niche advantage in Vulkan rendering.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from completely different architectural generations, and the specification data illustrates how much NVIDIA changed its design philosophy between them. The Tesla K20m uses the GK110 chip built on Kepler architecture, manufactured by TSMC at a 28 nm process node. It packs 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The GeForce RTX 3070, by contrast, uses the GA104 chip based on Ampere architecture, produced by Samsung at an 8 nm node. It contains 17,400 million transistors within a 392 mm² die, achieving a density of 44.4 million per square millimeter. The RTX 3070 has more than double the transistor count in a physically smaller package, and its density is roughly 3.5 times higher.

The memory subsystems differ substantially. The K20m ships with 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective speed of 5.2 Gbps. The RTX 3070 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a much higher effective speed of 14 Gbps and bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The RTX 3070's bandwidth is more than double the K20m's, despite having a narrower bus, because the faster GDDR6 memory compensates for the reduced bus width.

Core configurations show a major shift in NVIDIA's approach. The K20m has 2,496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 40 raster output units. The RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX 3070 has more than twice the shader count, a slightly lower TMU count, and a significantly higher ROP count. The RTX 3070 also introduces dedicated hardware that the K20m lacks entirely: 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores. These features enable real-time ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads, capabilities that simply do not exist on the Kepler architecture.

Clock speeds also differentiate the pair. The K20m's memory runs at 1300 MHz, while the RTX 3070's memory runs at 1750 MHz. The RTX 3070 has explicit base and boost clocks of 1500 MHz and 1725 MHz respectively, while the K20m's data does not list base or boost clocks. The resulting throughput figures are starkly different: the K20m achieves 36.71 GPixel/s pixel rate and 146.8 GTexel/s texture rate, while the RTX 3070 reaches 165.6 GPixel/s and 317.4 GTexel/s. In floating-point performance, the K20m delivers 3.524 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the RTX 3070 delivers 20.31 TFLOPS, a nearly sixfold difference. The RTX 3070 also lists FP16 performance at 20.31 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the K20m has no recorded FP16 figure.

Power and interface details also diverge. The K20m has a 225 W TDP and requires both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector, while the RTX 3070 has a 220 W TDP and uses a single 12-pin connector. Both cards suggest a 550 W power supply. The K20m runs on PCIe 2.0 x16, while the RTX 3070 runs on PCIe 4.0 x16. The K20m has no display outputs, reflecting its compute-focused design, while the RTX 3070 offers one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The K20m supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Physical dimensions differ slightly: the K20m measures 267 mm in length, while the RTX 3070 is 242 mm long and 112 mm tall. Both are dual-slot cards. The K20m was released on 2013-01-04 with a launch MSRP of 3,199 USD, while the RTX 3070 launched on 2020-08-31 with a launch MSRP of 499 USD. The K20m belongs to the Tesla Kepler generation, with Tesla Fermi as its predecessor and Tesla Maxwell as its successor. The RTX 3070 belongs to the GeForce 30-series, with GeForce 20 as its predecessor and GeForce 40 as its successor. Both cards are now end-of-life.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear recommendation for most users: the GeForce RTX 3070 is the superior card for general-purpose compute, as evidenced by its 85.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. That single result dwarfs the K20m's 4.3% Vulkan advantage in terms of real-world impact. The RTX 3070's FP32 throughput of 20.31 TFLOPS versus 3.524 TFLOPS, its 448.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 208.0 GB/s, its 5,888 shading units versus 2,496, and its additional ray tracing and tensor cores all reinforce this conclusion.

However, the K20m is not without merit. Its Vulkan win, while narrow, indicates that Kepler still handles certain graphics workloads competently. The K20m also holds a better average benchmark score (19,089 versus 17,208) and a higher percentile rank (64 versus 61), though these figures are influenced by the different test suites each card was subjected to. The K20m's 5 GB of memory on a wider 320-bit bus may also appeal to specific legacy compute tasks that favor that configuration.

Strictly from the data, the RTX 3070 is the pick for anyone needing modern compute performance, ray tracing, or high-bandwidth memory. The K20m is only preferable if the user specifically requires its Vulkan performance profile or needs to match an existing Kepler-based infrastructure. The RTX 3070's architectural advantages, from process node to core count to memory speed, make it the more capable and future-proof option in nearly every measurable category.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 wins decisively with a score of 112,821 against the Tesla K20m's 16,241, an 85.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Tesla K20m win any benchmark against the RTX 3070?

A: Yes, the K20m wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 21,936 versus the RTX 3070's 21,022, a 4.3% lead.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX 3070 has 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the K20m has 208.0 GB/s, making the RTX 3070 more than twice as fast in memory throughput.

Q: Does the RTX 3070 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX 3070 has 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores, while the K20m has neither feature.

Q: What is the FP32 compute performance of each card?

A: The RTX 3070 delivers 20.31 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the K20m delivers 3.524 TFLOPS, a nearly sixfold difference.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No, the RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the K20m supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce RTX 3070 wins in scenarios that demand raw compute throughput, high-bandwidth memory access, and modern hardware features. Its OpenCL dominance, 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, 20.31 TFLOPS FP32 performance, and 5,888 shading units make it the choice for machine learning inference, scientific simulation, video rendering, and any workload that leverages CUDA cores at scale. The inclusion of tensor cores and ray tracing cores further extends its reach into AI acceleration and real-time graphics effects. The RTX 3070 also wins on memory capacity with 8 GB versus 5 GB, and its PCIe 4.0 interface doubles the bus bandwidth available to the K20m's PCIe 2.0 connection.

The Tesla K20m wins in the narrow slice of Vulkan-based workloads, where its 4.3% edge over the RTX 3070 shows that Kepler's graphics pipeline still holds up for certain rendering tasks. The K20m also has a wider 320-bit memory bus, which can be advantageous in specific memory-layout-sensitive applications. Its 5 GB GDDR5 configuration, while slower overall, may be sufficient for legacy compute jobs that were originally developed for Kepler hardware. The K20m's average benchmark score of 19,089 versus 17,208 also suggests that in the aggregate of its tested workloads, it maintains a respectable standing, though this is heavily influenced by the inclusion of its strong Vulkan result.

For users with existing Tesla Kepler infrastructure, the K20m's compatibility with that ecosystem could be a deciding factor, but for new deployments or mixed workloads, the RTX 3070's breadth of capabilities makes it the more versatile winner.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification field. The K20m uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the RTX 3070 uses an 8 nm process from Samsung. Transistor counts are 7,080 million for the K20m and 17,400 million for the RTX 3070, with die sizes of 561 mm² and 392 mm² respectively, giving transistor densities of 12.6M per mm² and 44.4M per mm².

Memory configurations differ: the K20m has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus with 208.0 GB/s bandwidth and 1300 MHz memory clock (5.2 Gbps effective), while the RTX 3070 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth and 1750 MHz memory clock (14 Gbps effective). The K20m has 2,496 shading units, 208 TMUs, and 40 ROPs, while the RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX 3070 adds 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores, which the K20m lacks entirely.

Pixel and texture rates are 36.71 GPixel/s and 146.8 GTexel/s for the K20m, versus 165.6 GPixel/s and 317.4 GTexel/s for the RTX 3070. FP32 performance is 3.524 TFLOPS for the K20m and 20.31 TFLOPS for the RTX 3070, with the RTX 3070 also listing FP16 at 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP values are close at 225 W for the K20m and 220 W for the RTX 3070, but power connectors differ: the K20m uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin, while the RTX 3070 uses 1x 12-pin. Both suggest a 550 W PSU.

Bus interfaces are PCIe 2.0 x16 for the K20m and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 3070. Display outputs are absent on the K20m but present on the RTX 3070 as 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan: the K20m supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the RTX 3070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Dimensions show the K20m at 267 mm length and the RTX 3070 at 242 mm length and 112 mm height, both dual-slot. Release dates are 2013-01-04 for the K20m and 2020-08-31 for the RTX 3070.