AMD Radeon RX 6700S vs NVIDIA Tesla K20m Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 6700S is the clear performance winner in this comparison, taking both recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The data shows a 336.9% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and a 247.1% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. This is not a close contest by any metric available in the database. The RX 6700S also holds a higher average benchmark score at 22154 compared to 19089 for the Tesla K20m, and it sits at the 67th percentile versus the 64th percentile for the K20m.

For anyone selecting between these two, the choice depends entirely on workload context. The RX 6700S is an integrated mobile part designed for portable devices, while the Tesla K20m is a dual-slot, no-output compute accelerator from the Tesla Kepler generation. The RX 6700S should be selected for general graphics, modern API support, and mobile deployments. The Tesla K20m should only be considered if the workload specifically requires its older compute architecture, its 5 GB GDDR5 frame buffer with a 320-bit bus, or its specific form factor for legacy server integration. The RX 6700S outperforms the K20m in every benchmark where both have recorded data, so there is no performance-based argument for the older card.

Architecture Differences

The RX 6700S uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². The Tesla K20m uses the GK110 chip built on Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a much older 28 nm process. It contains 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding just 12.6M transistors per mm². The manufacturing process difference explains a great deal: the newer AMD part packs roughly 56% more transistors into less than half the die area.

The RX 6700S has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. It also includes 28 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Tesla K20m. The K20m counters with 2,496 shading units and 208 TMUs, but only 40 ROPs. In terms of raw pixel throughput, the RX 6700S delivers 128.0 GPixel/s versus 36.71 GPixel/s for the K20m. Texture rate favors the AMD card as well at 224.0 GTexel/s versus 146.8 GTexel/s.

Memory subsystems differ substantially. The RX 6700S uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla K20m uses 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus with 208.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite the wider bus on the K20m, the higher clocked GDDR6 memory on the RX 6700S produces slightly more raw bandwidth. Effective memory clock is 14 Gbps for the AMD card versus 5.2 Gbps for the NVIDIA card.

API support shows a major generational gap. The RX 6700S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla K20m supports only DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The AMD part is a PCIe 4.0 x8 device while the K20m uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The K20m has no display outputs, while the RX 6700S has portable device dependent outputs. Power delivery also differs dramatically: the RX 6700S is rated at 80 W TDP with no power connectors as an integrated part, whereas the K20m is rated at 225 W TDP and requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6700S wins in every benchmark category that has recorded data for both cards. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD card scores 70965 versus 16241 for the Tesla K20m, a 336.9% margin. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6700S scores 76150 versus 21936, a 247.1% margin. The database records 2 wins for the AMD card and 0 wins for the NVIDIA card. There is no benchmark in the head-to-head set where the Tesla K20m comes out ahead.

The Tesla K20m does have structural advantages that could matter in specific deployments. It offers a 320-bit memory bus compared to 128-bit on the AMD card, which could be relevant for certain memory-access patterns. It also has more shading units (2496 versus 1792) and more TMUs (208 versus 112), which in theory could help in compute workloads that are not captured by the recorded benchmarks. However, the available data does not show any scenario where these architectural traits translate into a measured win. The K20m also supports no ray tracing, while the RX 6700S includes 28 ray tracing cores.

For practical use cases, the RX 6700S is the choice for modern gaming, DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads, and any application leveraging Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla K20m is a legacy compute card with no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor. Its role would be limited to compute-only servers where its older Kepler architecture and 5 GB of GDDR5 memory are specifically required. The RX 6700S is end-of-life, but so is the K20m, and the newer AMD part is substantially more capable per the recorded data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700S has an average benchmark score of 22154, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20m has an average of 19089. The RX 6700S also sits at the 67th percentile among all GPUs compared to the 64th percentile for the K20m.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6700S in OpenCL performance?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700S scores 70965 versus 16241 for the Tesla K20m. This is a 336.9% advantage for the AMD card.

Q: Does the Tesla K20m support ray tracing?

A: No. The Tesla K20m has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The RX 6700S includes 28 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the K20m is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 6700S is rated at 80 W TDP with no power connectors, as it is an integrated part. The Tesla K20m is rated at 225 W TDP, requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Can the Tesla K20m output video to a display?

A: No. The Tesla K20m has no display outputs. The RX 6700S has portable device dependent display outputs, which means its output configuration depends on the host device.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6700S has 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The Tesla K20m has 208.0 GB/s from 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus. Despite the K20m's wider bus, the AMD card offers slightly higher bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these cards, and the results are lopsided in favor of the RX 6700S.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700S scores 70965. The Tesla K20m scores 16241. This produces a delta of 336.9% in favor of the AMD card. To put that in context, the K20m would need to nearly quadruple its score to match the RX 6700S. OpenCL is a compute-oriented API, and the gap here suggests the Kepler architecture, despite its higher shading unit count, is severely outmatched by the RDNA 2.0 design. The RX 6700S also has a much higher FP32 throughput at 7.168 TFLOPS versus 3.524 TFLOPS for the K20m, which likely contributes to this result.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6700S scores 76150. The Tesla K20m scores 21936. This is a 247.1% delta in favor of the AMD card. Vulkan is a modern low-level graphics and compute API, and the RX 6700S supports Vulkan 1.4 while the K20m only supports Vulkan 1.2.175. The version gap alone does not explain the performance difference, but the combination of newer architecture, higher clocks, and faster memory certainly does.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional context. The RX 6700S sits within 1.7% of the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT, which has an average score of 22549, and within 1.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile at 22435. It is 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB at 21856. The Tesla K20m, by contrast, is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 0.2% delta, the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 0.3% delta, and the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 at 0.3% delta. The K20m also trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 by 0.4%. This confirms that the K20m is performing at a level comparable to mid-range cards from several generations ago, while the RX 6700S is competitive with much more recent hardware.

The only benchmark where the K20m comes anywhere near the RX 6700S is in raw shading unit count, where it has 2496 versus 1792. However, this does not translate into any measured performance advantage. The RX 6700S wins both recorded benchmarks, and its average score of 22154 is 16.1% higher than the K20m's 19089. The percentile ranking gap, 67 versus 64, also reflects this overall performance difference.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification category recorded in the database.

Process node: the RX 6700S uses 7 nm, the Tesla K20m uses 28 nm. Transistor count: 11,060 million versus 7,080 million. Die size: 237 mm² versus 561 mm². Transistor density: 46.7M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm².

Memory: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus versus 5 GB GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus. Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). Bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 208.0 GB/s.

Shader resources: 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs versus 2,496 shading units, 208 TMUs, 40 ROPs. Ray tracing cores: 28 on the RX 6700S, none on the K20m.

Pixel rate: 128.0 GPixel/s versus 36.71 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 224.0 GTexel/s versus 146.8 GTexel/s. FP32: 7.168 TFLOPS versus 3.524 TFLOPS. FP16: 14.34 TFLOPS (2:1) on the RX 6700S, no recorded FP16 data for the K20m.

Power: 80 W TDP with no power connectors versus 225 W TDP with one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector. Suggested PSU: none for the RX 6700S, 550 W for the K20m. Slot width: IGP versus dual-slot. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs: portable device dependent versus no outputs.

APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 versus DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.175.

Release timing: the RX 6700S was released in January 2022, while the Tesla K20m was released in January 2013. The K20m has a successor (Tesla Maxwell) while the RX 6700S does not. The K20m has a launch MSRP of 3,199 USD. The RX 6700S has no recorded launch MSRP.

Physical dimensions: the K20m is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long. Length data for the RX 6700S is not recorded, consistent with its integrated form factor.

Both cards are end-of-life products, so neither is a forward-looking purchase. The data simply shows that the RX 6700S is the stronger performer across every recorded benchmark, with newer architecture, better API support, higher throughput, and lower power consumption.