NVIDIA Quadro K5000 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c Comparison

The Verdict

The data shows a clear split in purpose between these two Kepler-generation NVIDIA cards. The Tesla K20c is the compute specialist, while the Quadro K5000 is the visual workstation part. In the only common benchmark recorded, Geekbench OpenCL, the Tesla K20c wins narrowly by 0.5%, scoring 11,479 against the Quadro K5000's 11,418. However, the Quadro K5000 has a much broader benchmark profile, with recorded scores in Metal (6,324) and Vulkan (11,169) tests that the Tesla cannot run due to its lack of display outputs and compute-only design. The Tesla K20c also holds a higher percentile ranking at 51 versus the Quadro's 46, and its average benchmark score of 11,479 is 19.1% higher than the Quadro K5000's average of 9,637. For raw compute throughput, the Tesla K20c is the pick. For any workload requiring display output, the Quadro K5000 is the only functional choice between the two. The Tesla K20c sits 0.4% below the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M and 1.3% below the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT in average score, while the Quadro K5000 sits 0.1% above the GeForce GTX 960M and 0.8% below the Tesla C2070, placing both cards in the mid-range of the database's GPU population.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla K20c wins in pure computational throughput. Its FP32 performance of 3.524 TFLOPS is 62.5% higher than the Quadro K5000's 2.169 TFLOPS, and its texture rate of 146.8 GTexel/s is 62.4% higher than the Quadro's 90.37 GTexel/s. The pixel rate also favors the Tesla, at 36.71 GPixel/s versus 22.59 GPixel/s, a 62.5% advantage. These are compute-oriented wins, reflecting the Tesla's larger chip and higher shading unit count of 2,496 versus 1,536.

The Quadro K5000 wins in every scenario that requires visual output. It offers 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the Tesla K20c has no display outputs at all. The Quadro also carries a significantly lower power draw at 122 W versus 225 W, and it requires only a 300 W suggested power supply versus 550 W for the Tesla. For workstation use where the GPU must drive monitors, the Quadro is the only viable option. Its Vulkan score of 11,169 and Metal score of 6,324 demonstrate that it can handle modern graphics APIs, while the Tesla K20c has no recorded scores for those tests.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the Kepler architecture and are built by TSMC on the same 28 nm process node. The fundamental difference lies in the chip design. The Tesla K20c uses the GK110 chip with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The Quadro K5000 uses the smaller GK104 chip with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, a density of 12.0 million per mm². The Tesla's chip is exactly double the transistor count and nearly double the die area, which explains its higher compute throughput.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. The Tesla K20c has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K5000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s. Both use GDDR5, but the Tesla's wider bus and larger capacity favor compute workloads that need more memory and bandwidth. The Quadro's memory clock is slightly higher at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) versus the Tesla's 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), but the wider bus on the Tesla wins overall.

The Tesla K20c also has a higher base clock advantage in terms of raw resources, though the Quadro lists a base clock of 706 MHz with boost also at 706 MHz, while the Tesla does not list base or boost clocks in the database. Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, so API compatibility is identical. Power connectors differ: the Tesla requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin, while the Quadro needs only 1x 6-pin. Both are dual-slot cards and share the same 267 mm length, though the Quadro adds a 111 mm height specification.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The Tesla K20c edges out the Quadro K5000 in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 11,479 versus 11,418, a 0.5% advantage.

Q: Can the Tesla K20c output video to a monitor?

A: No. The Tesla K20c has no display outputs, while the Quadro K5000 provides 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 connections.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Tesla K20c draws 225 W and suggests a 550 W power supply, while the Quadro K5000 draws 122 W and suggests a 300 W power supply.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Tesla K20c delivers 208.0 GB/s over a 320-bit bus, versus the Quadro K5000's 172.8 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. The Tesla leads by 20.4%.

Q: Are both cards the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use the Kepler architecture and are fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process. The Tesla uses the GK110 chip, while the Quadro uses the GK104 chip.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: Only the Quadro K5000 has a recorded Vulkan score of 11,169. The Tesla K20c has no Vulkan benchmark recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison recorded is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Tesla K20c scores 11,479 and the Quadro K5000 scores 11,418. The Tesla wins by 61 points, a 0.5% delta. This is a narrow margin, but it is consistent with the Tesla's higher FP32 throughput of 3.524 TFLOPS versus 2.169 TFLOPS. The Tesla also wins on texture rate (146.8 GTexel/s versus 90.37 GTexel/s, a 62.4% lead) and pixel rate (36.71 GPixel/s versus 22.59 GPixel/s, a 62.5% lead). These are large compute advantages, but they do not translate into a large OpenCL score gap, suggesting that the OpenCL workload is not purely shader-bound or that memory bandwidth is a limiting factor.

The Quadro K5000 counters with its multi-API capabilities. Its Vulkan score of 11,169 is within 2.7% of the Tesla's OpenCL score, and its Metal score of 6,324 is lower but still present. The Quadro's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 9,637, which places it at the 46th percentile. The Tesla's average is 11,479, at the 51st percentile. Looking at nearest rivals, the Tesla K20c's 11,479 average is 0.4% below the Radeon Pro 5500M (11,528) and 1.7% below the GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680), while being 1.9% above the GeForce GTX 780M (11,261). The Quadro K5000's 9,637 average is 0.1% above the GTX 960M (9,645) and 0.8% below the Tesla C2070 (9,716), with the Quadro P4000 (9,665) sitting 0.3% above it.

The memory bandwidth difference is notable. The Tesla's 208.0 GB/s is 20.4% higher than the Quadro's 172.8 GB/s. The Tesla also has 5 GB of memory versus 4 GB, a 25% capacity advantage. For workloads that stream large datasets, this is a decisive difference. The Quadro's higher effective memory clock (5.4 Gbps versus 5.2 Gbps) does not compensate for its narrower 256-bit bus.

The power envelope is a major differentiator. The Quadro K5000 draws 122 W, which is 45.8% less than the Tesla's 225 W. The Quadro's single 6-pin connector and 300 W suggested power supply make it feasible in far more system configurations. The Tesla's 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin requirement and 550 W suggestion restrict it to compute chassis with robust power delivery.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla K20c | NVIDIA Quadro K5000 |

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

| Chip | GK110 | GK104 |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 706 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 706 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) | 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 5 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 320 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 208.0 GB/s | 172.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2496 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 208 | 128 |

| ROPs | 40 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 36.71 GPixel/s | 22.59 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 146.8 GTexel/s | 90.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.524 TFLOPS | 2.169 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 225 W | 122 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 300 W |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| Launch MSRP | 3,199 USD | 2,499 USD |

| Release Date | 2012-11-11 | 2012-08-16 |

| Predecessor | Tesla Fermi | Quadro Fermi |

| Successor | Tesla Maxwell | Quadro Maxwell |

The Tesla K20c is the larger, more powerful compute card with 62.5% more FP32 throughput, 62.4% more texture fill rate, and 20.4% more memory bandwidth. The Quadro K5000 is the lower-power, display-capable workstation card with a 45.8% lower TDP and the only one of the two that can drive monitors. Both are end-of-life products, share the Kepler architecture and 28 nm TSMC process, and offer identical API support. The Tesla's launch MSRP was 3,199 USD, while the Quadro's was 2,499 USD. The Quadro K5000 launched earlier on 2012-08-16, while the Tesla K20c followed on 2012-11-11.