NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell vs NVIDIA Tesla K20m Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the NVIDIA Tesla K20m and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell. Instead, the database contains separate benchmark entries for each card, measured under different test suites. This makes a direct apples-to-apples comparison impossible from the available measurements.

The Tesla K20m was evaluated with two tests. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 16,241, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 21,936. Averaging these two results gives the Tesla K20m an average benchmark score of 19,089. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell was tested with a single workload, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it recorded a score of 16,408. That single result also serves as its average benchmark score.

Looking at the raw averages, the Tesla K20m posts a higher mean score (19,089 versus 16,408). However, this comparison is misleading because the tests are entirely different. The Geekbench suite stresses compute and API throughput on older architectures, while 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is a modern DirectX 12 workload. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is being asked to run a much heavier, contemporary graphics test, so its lower score does not indicate inferior performance.

The percentile rankings further complicate any direct comparison. The Tesla K20m sits at the 64th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell lands at the 59th percentile. Again, this is not a like-for-like ranking because the underlying benchmark distributions differ. A percentile reflects how a card compares to others within the same test pool, not across different test suites.

The nearest rivals for each card provide context. The Tesla K20m’s closest competitors, by average score, are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 at 19,164 (a 0.4% lead over the K20m), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 19,049 (0.2% behind the K20m), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 19,036 (0.3% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 19,030 (0.3% behind). This cluster of scores, all within a fraction of a percent, shows the Tesla K20m is essentially performance-matched with a mid-range mobile GPU and an older desktop card from its era.

For the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 at 16,415 (statistically tied at 0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT at 16,361 (0.3% behind the RTX PRO), the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at 16,351 (0.4% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 at 16,504 (0.6% ahead). This shows the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, despite its massive specifications, posts a benchmark score very close to several mid-range and older consumer cards. The spread among these rivals is also minimal, all within 0.6% of each other.

Given the lack of overlapping benchmark tests, the head-to-head comparison must be read cautiously. The Tesla K20m wins on raw average score and percentile placement, but those wins come from different workloads. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell’s 3DMark score, while lower in absolute terms, is achieved on a test that the Tesla K20m was never subjected to. No cross-test score is directly comparable.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is the objectively superior product in nearly every measurable hardware category. It carries a modern architecture, vastly more compute resources, and a much larger memory subsystem. The Tesla K20m is an end-of-life product from 2013, built on a 28 nm process with 7,080 million transistors, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell uses a 5 nm process with 92,200 million transistors. The Blackwell card has 24,064 shading units versus 2,496 on the K20m, a 9.6x increase. Its FP32 throughput is 126.0 TFLOPS, compared to 3.524 TFLOPS on the K20m, a 35.8x jump.

Memory differences are equally stark. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell offers 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla K20m has 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, with 208.0 GB/s. That is a 8.6x bandwidth advantage and a 19.2x capacity advantage for the newer card. The RTX PRO also supports modern features like 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores, both absent from the K20m.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is also the only one of the two with display outputs, offering 4x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the Tesla K20m has no outputs at all. The newer card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the K20m is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

However, the benchmark data tells a different story. The Tesla K20m has a higher average score and a higher percentile rank. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell’s single 3DMark score places it lower in the database rankings. This is partially due to the different test workloads, but it also suggests that the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell may be specialized for professional compute tasks rather than the specific DX12 gaming workload measured.

Who should pick which? For anyone running modern DirectX 12 workloads, AI inference, or large-scale data processing, the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is the clear choice based on its architecture, memory, and feature set. For legacy OpenCL compute tasks that match the K20m’s era, the Tesla K20m remains a functional, low-power option, but the data does not support choosing it over the Blackwell card for any modern application.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla K20m wins in the database’s average benchmark score (19,089 versus 16,408) and in percentile ranking (64th versus 59th). It also wins on power efficiency, with a 225 W TDP versus 600 W on the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, and on physical size, at 267 mm length versus 304 mm. Its PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while older, is still functional.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell wins decisively in every raw specification category. It has more shading units, texture mapping units, and ROPs (752 TMUs and 192 ROPs versus 208 and 40 on the K20m). Its pixel rate is 502.5 GPixel/s versus 36.71 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 1,968.0 GTexel/s versus 146.8 GTexel/s. It supports ray tracing and tensor cores, which the K20m lacks entirely. Its memory is faster, larger, and on a wider bus. It has display outputs, supports PCIe 5.0, and uses a single 16-pin power connector instead of two older connectors.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell also wins on transistor density, packing 122.9M transistors per square millimeter versus 12.6M on the K20m, a 9.8x improvement. Its die size is larger (750 mm² versus 561 mm²), but its process node is far more advanced (5 nm versus 28 nm).

In terms of API support, the Blackwell card wins as well, offering the latest DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 standards. The K20m’s OpenGL 4.6 support matches the Blackwell card, but its Vulkan version is older.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20m has an average benchmark score of 19,089, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell has an average score of 16,408.

Q: What is the memory capacity of each card?

A: The Tesla K20m has 5 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell has 96 GB of GDDR7 memory.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell supports these features, with 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores. The Tesla K20m has neither.

Q: What is the FP32 compute performance difference?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell delivers 126.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Tesla K20m delivers 3.524 TFLOPS. The Blackwell card is approximately 35.8 times faster.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The Tesla K20m has no display outputs.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Tesla K20m has a TDP of 225 W, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell has a TDP of 600 W. The suggested PSU for the K20m is 550 W, while the Blackwell card requires a 1000 W PSU.

Architecture Differences

The Tesla K20m uses the GK110 chip, built on the Kepler architecture at a 28 nm process node from TSMC. It contains 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6M per square millimeter. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell uses the GB202 chip, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture at a 5 nm process node, also from TSMC. It contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 122.9M per square millimeter.

The K20m has 2,496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 40 ROPs. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell has 24,064 shading units, 752 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The Blackwell card adds 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Kepler-based K20m. The K20m’s pixel rate is 36.71 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 146.8 GTexel/s. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell achieves 502.5 GPixel/s and 1,968.0 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The K20m uses 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus with 208.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell uses 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The clock configurations also differ: the K20m has no listed base or boost clock, while the Blackwell card has a base clock of 1590 MHz and a boost clock of 2617 MHz.

API support reflects the generational gap. The K20m supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Blackwell card also supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the K20m is limited to PCIe 2.0 x16.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The process node differs: 28 nm for the Tesla K20m versus 5 nm for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell. Transistor count differs from 7,080 million to 92,200 million. Die size differs from 561 mm² to 750 mm². Transistor density differs from 12.6M / mm² to 122.9M / mm².

Memory specifications differ entirely: the K20m has 5 GB GDDR5 with a 320-bit bus and 208.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Blackwell card has 96 GB GDDR7 with a 512-bit bus and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is listed as 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) for the K20m and 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell.

Compute resources differ as listed: shading units (2,496 versus 24,064), TMUs (208 versus 752), ROPs (40 versus 192), RT cores (none versus 188), and tensor cores (none versus 752). FP32 performance differs from 3.524 TFLOPS to 126.0 TFLOPS. The Blackwell card also lists FP16 performance at 126.0 TFLOPS (1:1), while the K20m lists no FP16 figure.

Power and physical specifications differ: TDP is 225 W for the K20m versus 600 W for the Blackwell card. The K20m uses 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, while the Blackwell card uses 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU differs from 550 W to 1000 W. The K20m has no display outputs, while the Blackwell card has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. The bus interface differs from PCIe 2.0 x16 to PCIe 5.0 x16. The K20m measures 267 mm in length, while the Blackwell card measures 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

Production status differs: the K20m is end-of-life, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is active. Release dates differ: the K20m launched in January 2013, while the Blackwell card launched in March 2025. The K20m’s predecessor is Tesla Fermi and its successor is Tesla Maxwell, while the Blackwell card’s predecessor is Workstation Ada and it has no listed successor.