NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile vs NVIDIA Tesla K10 Comparison

NVIDIA’s Tesla K10 and RTX A2000 Mobile sit at opposite ends of the GPU design spectrum, yet benchmark data places them in the same performance percentile. The K10 is a dual-slot, 225 W desktop accelerator from the Kepler era, while the A2000 Mobile is an 8 nm Ampere part built for laptops. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical — 14,029 for the K10 versus 13,821 for the A2000 Mobile — which explains why they appear as nearest rivals to each other with a deltaPct of just 1.5% from the K10’s perspective and -1.5% from the A2000 Mobile’s. But that average hides a dramatic split in how they achieve their results, especially in compute-oriented workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is not close. The RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518, while the Tesla K10 scores 14,029. That is a 75.2% deficit for the K10, meaning the A2000 Mobile delivers roughly four times the OpenCL compute performance. This is the single biggest win for the A2000 Mobile, and it aligns with the raw specification differences: the A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units versus 1,536 on the K10, and its FP32 throughput is 8.637 TFLOPS compared to 2.289 TFLOPS. The K10 cannot match that in any compute scenario.

The K10’s only counterpoint is that it ties the A2000 Mobile in the overall percentile ranking — both sit at the 55th percentile of all GPUs. The average benchmark scores are also close, with the K10 at 14,029 and the A2000 Mobile at 13,821. However, the A2000 Mobile’s average is dragged down by its Passmark results, which include low scores like 57 for DirectX 10, 68 for DirectX 11, and 47 for DirectX 12. The K10 has no Passmark entries in the data, so its average is based solely on the single Geekbench OpenCL run. This means the K10’s average is a one-test snapshot, while the A2000 Mobile’s average is a composite of nine different benchmarks.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card reinforces the oddity of the comparison. The K10’s closest rival is the GeForce GTX 680, which scores 14,150 — a 0.9% difference. The A2000 Mobile’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 660M, scoring 13,812, just 0.1% away. In both cases, the deltaPct values are small, indicating that these cards occupy a tight performance band in terms of average scores. Yet the A2000 Mobile’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 53,146 shows that it excels in modern APIs, while the K10 has no Vulkan benchmark entry.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K10 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 14,029, compared to the RTX A2000 Mobile’s 13,821. That is a 1.5% difference in favor of the K10.

Q: How do they compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile wins decisively with a score of 56,518 versus the Tesla K10’s 14,029. The A2000 Mobile is 75.2% ahead in this specific test.

Q: Are these GPUs in the same performance tier?

A: Yes, both sit at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, and their average scores are within 1.5% of each other. However, the K10’s average is based on a single test, while the A2000 Mobile’s average spans nine tests.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: Both have 4 GB of memory, but the K10 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the A2000 Mobile uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The A2000 Mobile has higher bandwidth despite the narrower bus.

Q: Which GPU supports newer DirectX features?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Tesla K10 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The A2000 Mobile also has 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, which the K10 lacks entirely.

Q: What about power consumption?

A: The Tesla K10 has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, whereas the RTX A2000 Mobile has a TDP of 95 W and uses no power connectors, being an IGP (integrated graphics processor) for mobile devices.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the better choice for anyone prioritizing modern compute performance and API support. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 56,518, which is 75.2% higher than the K10’s 14,029, and it also has a Vulkan score of 53,146 that the K10 cannot post. The A2000 Mobile’s FP32 throughput of 8.637 TFLOPS is nearly four times the K10’s 2.289 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate of 80.98 GPixel/s dwarfs the K10’s 23.84 GPixel/s.

However, the Tesla K10 is not without merit in one narrow sense: its average benchmark score of 14,029 is higher than the A2000 Mobile’s 13,821, and it ties the A2000 Mobile at the 55th percentile. If you are looking at aggregate numbers alone, the K10 edges out the A2000 Mobile. But that edge comes from a single test, while the A2000 Mobile’s average is diluted by its weak Passmark DirectX scores (57, 68, 47 for DX10, DX11, DX12). In real-world compute workloads, the A2000 Mobile is the clear winner.

The K10’s only practical advantage is its 256-bit memory bus and 128 TMUs, which give it a texture rate of 95.36 GTexel/s compared to the A2000 Mobile’s 135.0 GTexel/s — the A2000 Mobile still wins that spec. For a builder choosing between these two, the A2000 Mobile is the only sensible pick for modern software, while the K10 is a relic from 2012 that only makes sense if you need a specific legacy Kepler feature.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification. The Tesla K10 uses a GK104 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The RTX A2000 Mobile uses a GA107 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story: 12.0M / mm² for the K10 versus 43.5M / mm² for the A2000 Mobile.

Memory configurations diverge as well. Both have 4 GB, but the K10 uses GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the A2000 Mobile uses GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The K10’s memory clock is 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the A2000 Mobile runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Core counts differ significantly: the K10 has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The A2000 Mobile also has 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores; the K10 has none. Clock speeds are only listed for the A2000 Mobile (base 1215 MHz, boost 1687 MHz); the K10 has no base or boost clock in the data. Pixel rate is 23.84 GPixel/s for the K10 versus 80.98 GPixel/s for the A2000 Mobile. Texture rate is 95.36 GTexel/s versus 135.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 2.289 TFLOPS versus 8.637 TFLOPS, and the A2000 Mobile also lists FP16 at 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specs are polar opposites: the K10 has a 225 W TDP, dual-slot width, 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin connectors, a 550 W suggested PSU, and dimensions of 272 mm (10.7 inches). The A2000 Mobile has a 95 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and no listed dimensions. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for the K10 versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the A2000 Mobile. Display outputs are "No outputs" for the K10 versus "Portable Device Dependent" for the A2000 Mobile.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The Tesla K10 is built on NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture, released in 2012 with the GK104 chip. The RTX A2000 Mobile uses Ampere, released in 2021 with the GA107 chip. Kepler is a 28 nm design from TSMC, while Ampere is an 8 nm design from Samsung. The K10’s generation is listed as "Tesla Kepler (Kxx)" and its predecessor is Tesla Fermi, with Tesla Maxwell as the successor. The A2000 Mobile’s generation is "Ampere-MW (Ax000)", with Quadro Turing-M as its predecessor and Ada-MW as its successor.

The K10 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The A2000 Mobile’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support includes hardware ray tracing and tensor cores, which are absent on the K10. The K10 has no RT cores and no tensor cores, while the A2000 Mobile has 20 and 80, respectively. The transistor count difference is stark: 3,540 million versus 8,700 million, on a smaller die (294 mm² versus 200 mm²), meaning the A2000 Mobile packs more than three times the transistor density.

The K10’s memory subsystem is older GDDR5 with a wider 256-bit bus, but the A2000 Mobile’s GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus achieves higher bandwidth (192.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s) thanks to faster effective memory speed (12 Gbps versus 5 Gbps). The A2000 Mobile also has a higher pixel rate (80.98 GPixel/s versus 23.84 GPixel/s) and texture rate (135.0 GTexel/s versus 95.36 GTexel/s), despite having fewer TMUs (80 versus 128). This is a direct result of the Ampere architecture’s higher clock speeds and efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A2000 Mobile wins in every compute-oriented category from the data. It dominates Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 56,518, a 75.2% advantage over the K10’s 14,029. It also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 53,146, which the K10 cannot produce. In raw throughput, the A2000 Mobile’s FP32 of 8.637 TFLOPS is 3.77 times the K10’s 2.289 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate is 3.4 times higher, and its texture rate is 1.42 times higher. The A2000 Mobile also supports ray tracing and tensor cores, which the K10 lacks entirely.

The Tesla K10’s wins are more subtle. It has a higher average benchmark score (14,029 versus 13,821) and a higher percentile ranking is tied at 55. In the nearest rivals comparison, the K10’s deltaPct to the A2000 Mobile is +1.5%, meaning the K10 is 1.5% ahead in aggregate. The K10 also has a wider memory bus (256-bit versus 128-bit) and more TMUs (128 versus 80), though these do not translate into higher bandwidth or texture rate. The K10’s only real advantage is its dual-slot desktop form factor with dedicated power connectors, which allows it to draw 225 W versus the A2000 Mobile’s 95 W — but that extra power does not yield better performance in any listed benchmark.

For use cases: the A2000 Mobile is the clear pick for any modern workload involving OpenCL, Vulkan, DirectX 12 Ultimate, or ray tracing. The K10 is only relevant if you need a legacy Kepler device for a specific older application, and even then its 4 GB GDDR5 and 160.0 GB/s bandwidth are inferior to the A2000 Mobile’s 4 GB GDDR6 and 192.0 GB/s. The data does not support choosing the K10 for any performance reason; its only claim is a marginally higher average score from a single test, and that is not enough to recommend it over the A2000 Mobile.