AMD Radeon RX 6500M vs NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two GPUs cleanly across workloads, with the AMD Radeon RX 6500M taking the only direct head-to-head victory. In the recorded database, the RX 6500M wins 1 of the shared benchmark tests, while the NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm wins none. That single win is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD part scores 38,586 against the Tesla's 17,215, a gap of 55.4% in favor of the RX 6500M. This is not a marginal edge; it is a decisive margin that points to a fundamental difference in how each card handles compute workloads.

However, the Tesla K20Xm does not disappear from the picture. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 12,625, which places it in the 52nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RX 6500M's average score is 10,362, sitting in the 48th percentile. So while the AMD card wins the OpenCL head-to-head, the Tesla holds a higher overall average when every test in its own record is considered. The Tesla also has a higher percentile ranking, suggesting that its performance profile is more consistent across the broader set of benchmarks where it appears.

Looking at the rival comparisons, the Tesla K20Xm sits very close to the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT, which averages 12,710, a delta of only -0.7%. It is also within 1.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 and the AMD Radeon Pro 455. The RX 6500M, by contrast, is nearest to the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 with an average of 10,400 (-0.4%), and it trails the AMD Radeon RX 550X by 1.1%. This places the two cards in different performance neighborhoods despite the RX 6500M's single-test dominance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different design philosophies and process generations. The Tesla K20Xm uses the GK110 chip built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 7,080 million transistors on a die size of 561 mm², giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The RX 6500M is built on the Navi 24 chip with AMD's RDNA 2.0 architecture, made on a 6 nm process also at TSMC. It has 5,400 million transistors packed into a much smaller 107 mm² die, yielding a density of 50.5 million per square millimeter, roughly four times denser.

The compute resources diverge sharply. The Tesla K20Xm has 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The RX 6500M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD card counters with 16 ray tracing cores, a feature the Tesla lacks entirely. Neither card has tensor cores. The clock behavior also differs: the Tesla lists no base or boost clock in the database, while the RX 6500M runs a 2000 MHz base, 2400 MHz boost, and 2191 MHz game clock.

Memory architecture reinforces the generational gap. The Tesla uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 249.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 144.0 GB/s. The AMD part's memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, while the Tesla's memory runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective. The Tesla's wider bus gives it more bandwidth, but the RX 6500M's faster memory technology compensates partially. The RX 6500M also supports PCIe 4.0 x4, while the Tesla uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is lopsided. The RX 6500M scores 38,586, while the Tesla K20Xm scores 17,215. The delta is -55.4%, meaning the AMD card is more than twice as fast in this specific test. This is a massive single-test win, and it likely reflects the RX 6500M's modern architecture with higher clocks, ray tracing support, and a more efficient instruction pipeline for OpenCL workloads.

That said, the overall average scores tell a different story. The Tesla averages 12,625 across its recorded benchmarks, which include Geekbench Metal at 8,035 and Geekbench OpenCL at 17,215. The RX 6500M averages 10,362 across a broader set: Geekbench OpenCL at 38,586, Geekbench Vulkan at 43,837, Passmark DirectX 10 at 52, DirectX 11 at 70, DirectX 12 at 34, DirectX 9 at 92, G2D at 385, G3D at 7,531, and GPU compute at 2,669. The Tesla's higher average comes from having fewer low-scoring legacy tests in its record, while the RX 6500M's Passmark DirectX scores drag its average down despite the strong OpenCL and Vulkan results.

The rival deltas reinforce this split. The Tesla's nearest rival, the RX 7600M XT, is only 0.7% ahead, and the GTX 670 is 1.2% ahead. The RX 6500M's nearest rival, the Tesla C2075, is 0.4% behind, and the GTX 950A is 0.9% behind. In both cases, the two cards are competitive with their immediate neighbors, but the neighborhoods themselves are far apart.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every specification field. The process node is 28 nm for the Tesla versus 6 nm for the RX 6500M. Transistor count is 7,080 million versus 5,400 million. Die size is 561 mm² versus 107 mm². Transistor density is 12.6M/mm² versus 50.5M/mm². The Tesla has no base or boost clock recorded, while the RX 6500M has 2000 MHz base, 2400 MHz boost, and 2191 MHz game clock.

Memory size is 6 GB versus 4 GB. Memory type is GDDR5 versus GDDR6. Bus width is 384 bit versus 64 bit. Bandwidth is 249.6 GB/s versus 144.0 GB/s. Shading units are 2,688 versus 1,024. TMUs are 224 versus 64. ROPs are 48 versus 32. The RX 6500M has 16 ray tracing cores; the Tesla has none. FP32 performance is 3.935 TFLOPS for the Tesla versus 4.915 TFLOPS for the RX 6500M. The RX 6500M also has FP16 at 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1), which the Tesla does not list.

Power and physical dimensions diverge as well. The Tesla has a TDP of 235 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W, while the RX 6500M has a TDP of only 50 W with no suggested PSU. The Tesla is dual-slot with a length of 267 mm (10.5 inches) and no display outputs. The RX 6500M is IGP-class with no dimensions and portable-device-dependent outputs. The Tesla uses PCIe 3.0 x16; the RX 6500M uses PCIe 4.0 x4. The Tesla supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Vulkan support is 1.2.175 for the Tesla versus 1.4 for the RX 6500M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm has an average benchmark score of 12,625, which is higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6500M's average of 10,362.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6500M in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RX 6500M scores 38,586 versus the Tesla's 17,215, a delta of -55.4% in favor of the AMD card.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two cards?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter, while the RX 6500M has 50.5 million per square millimeter, roughly four times higher.

Q: Does the Tesla K20Xm support ray tracing?

A: No, the Tesla K20Xm has no ray tracing cores. The RX 6500M has 16 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The Tesla K20Xm has 249.6 GB/s of bandwidth from a 384-bit GDDR5 bus, while the RX 6500M has 144.0 GB/s from a 64-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Tesla K20Xm ranks in the 52nd percentile, while the RX 6500M ranks in the 48th percentile.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear use-case split. The AMD Radeon RX 6500M is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that lean on OpenCL, where it more than doubles the Tesla's score. Its modern RDNA 2.0 architecture with ray tracing, higher clocks, and FP16 support makes it better suited to current API demands, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. For a mobile or low-power context, its 50 W TDP and IGP form factor are decisive advantages.

The NVIDIA Tesla K20Xm, however, remains competitive for scenarios where raw memory bandwidth and a wider bus matter, and it holds a higher overall average score and percentile ranking. Its 249.6 GB/s bandwidth and 6 GB of memory give it an edge in memory-bound tasks, and its 3.935 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is within 20% of the RX 6500M's 4.915 TFLOPS. The Tesla's 235 W TDP and dual-slot design are not portable, but for a workstation or server environment with a 550 W PSU, it still delivers respectable results.

The record shows two cards at different points in the performance spectrum. The RX 6500M wins the head-to-head and offers modern feature support, but the Tesla's higher average score and percentile suggest it remains a viable option for legacy or bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The choice depends on whether the workload favors the RX 6500M's OpenCL strength and efficiency or the Tesla's memory throughput and consistency. There is no universal winner; the data simply maps each card to its niche.