AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs NVIDIA Tesla K80 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla K80 and AMD Radeon Pro 560 represent two very different approaches to GPU design, separated by their target platforms, architectures, and intended workloads. The Tesla K80 is a dual-GPU compute accelerator from NVIDIA’s Tesla Kepler generation, designed for high-performance computing and datacenter tasks. The Radeon Pro 560 is a mobile-class GPU from AMD’s GCN 4.0 family, built for professional Mac workstations and portable devices. Benchmark data shows that the Tesla K80 takes a clear lead in raw compute performance, but the Radeon Pro 560 counters with superior efficiency and modern API support. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, answers common questions, and provides a verdict based strictly on the available data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark results are decisive, with the NVIDIA Tesla K80 winning both available tests. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Tesla K80 scores 18,620 compared to the Radeon Pro 560’s 15,504. That is a 20.1% advantage for the NVIDIA card. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the Tesla K80 delivers significantly higher raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads. The margin is consistent with the underlying hardware specifications: the Tesla K80 features 2,496 shading units, 208 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, while the Radeon Pro 560 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Tesla K80 also posts a much higher FP32 performance of 4.113 TFLOPS versus 1.858 TFLOPS for the AMD card.

In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Tesla K80 again comes out ahead, scoring 19,111 against the Radeon Pro 560’s 16,232. This translates to a 17.7% lead for the NVIDIA card. The Vulkan results follow the same pattern as OpenCL, with the Tesla K80’s higher compute resources and memory bandwidth driving the win. The Tesla K80 has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 240.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon Pro 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 81.28 GB/s. This memory bandwidth gap is a major factor in the performance difference, especially for memory-intensive compute tasks.

It is importantly the Radeon Pro 560 has a benchmark result in Geekbench Metal that the Tesla K80 lacks entirely. The AMD card scores 20,918 in Metal, which is its best benchmark result. However, since the Tesla K80 does not have a Metal score, this cannot be directly compared. The average benchmark score for the Tesla K80 is 18,866, while the Radeon Pro 560 averages 17,551. This gives the Tesla K80 an overall edge in average performance, and its percentile ranking of 63 against all GPUs is slightly higher than the Radeon Pro 560’s 61st percentile.

The data shows that the Tesla K80 wins both head-to-head tests, but the Radeon Pro 560 is not without its strengths. The AMD card’s Metal score of 20,918 suggests that in Apple’s Metal API, it may outperform the NVIDIA card, which has no Metal support listed. Additionally, the Radeon Pro 560’s Vulkan score of 16,232, while lower than the Tesla K80’s 19,111, is still respectable given the card’s much lower power envelope and mobile positioning.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has a higher average benchmark score of 18,866, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 560’s average of 17,551. This represents a difference of roughly 7.5% in favor of the Tesla K80.

Q: How does the Tesla K80 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Tesla K80’s average score of 18,866 places it close to several modern GPUs. It is 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (18,789), and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18,954). It also trails the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19,030) and AMD Radeon RX 6600 (19,036) by 0.9% each.

Q: What is the Radeon Pro 560’s performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon Pro 560’s average score of 17,551 is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon 780M (17,588) and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639). It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17,509) and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (17,468).

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 560 support DirectX 12 at a higher feature level than the Tesla K80?

A: Yes. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA Tesla K80 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). This means the Radeon Pro 560 has a more modern DirectX feature set, which could benefit certain gaming or graphics workloads.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 240.6 GB/s, thanks to its 384-bit memory bus and 12 GB of GDDR5 memory. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 offers 81.28 GB/s over a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: How do the power requirements differ between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K80 has a thermal design power (TDP) of 300 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector, with a suggested power supply of 700 W. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has a TDP of just 75 W, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed.

The Verdict

The data clearly shows that the NVIDIA Tesla K80 is the superior performer in raw compute benchmarks. It wins both head-to-head tests with substantial margins: 20.1% in OpenCL and 17.7% in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 18,866 is higher than the Radeon Pro 560’s 17,551, and it ranks in the 63rd percentile against all GPUs, compared to the AMD card’s 61st percentile. For anyone prioritizing OpenCL or Vulkan compute performance, the Tesla K80 is the obvious choice based on the numbers.

However, the Radeon Pro 560 has its own advantages that should not be overlooked. Its Metal benchmark score of 20,918 is its strongest result, and it supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, both of which are more modern than the Tesla K80’s DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175 support. The Radeon Pro 560 also consumes just 75 W of power, a quarter of the Tesla K80’s 300 W TDP, and requires no external power connectors. For users in the Apple ecosystem or those needing low-power, portable GPU solutions, the Radeon Pro 560 is a more practical fit.

The verdict depends on the use case. For compute-heavy workloads where performance is paramount, the Tesla K80 is the clear winner. For mobile or Mac-based professional work where power efficiency, modern API support, and Metal compatibility matter more, the Radeon Pro 560 is the better option.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every key specification, reflecting their distinct design goals. The NVIDIA Tesla K80 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 7,100 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.7 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro 560 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 24.4 million per mm². The AMD chip is more modern and denser, but the NVIDIA chip has far more raw resources.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The Tesla K80 offers 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, with 240.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 81.28 GB/s. The Tesla K80’s base clock is 562 MHz with a boost clock of 824 MHz, while the Radeon Pro 560 has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). The Tesla K80’s memory clock is 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the NVIDIA card. The Tesla K80 has 2,496 shading units, 208 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the Radeon Pro 560 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate and texture rate follow the same trend: the Tesla K80 achieves 42.85 GPixel/s and 171.4 GTexel/s, versus 14.51 GPixel/s and 58.05 GTexel/s for the AMD card. FP32 performance is 4.113 TFLOPS for NVIDIA and 1.858 TFLOPS for AMD. The Radeon Pro 560 also lists FP16 performance at 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1), while the Tesla K80 has no FP16 data.

Form factor and power are major differentiators. The Tesla K80 is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long, with a 300 W TDP, one 8-pin connector, and a suggested 700 W PSU. The Radeon Pro 560 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a 75 W TDP and no power connectors. The Tesla K80 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the Radeon Pro 560 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the Tesla K80 has no outputs, while the Radeon Pro 560’s outputs are portable device dependent.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The NVIDIA Tesla K80 is based on the Kepler 2.0 architecture, using the GK210 chip. It belongs to the Tesla Kepler (Kxx) generation, succeeding Tesla Fermi and preceding Tesla Maxwell. Kepler 2.0 was designed for high-throughput compute, which explains the Tesla K80’s massive shading unit count and memory bandwidth. The card’s production status is end-of-life, and it was released on November 16, 2014.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture, built on the Polaris 21 chip. It is part of the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) generation. GCN 4.0 is a more modern architecture with better efficiency and feature support, which is reflected in its smaller die and lower power consumption. The Radeon Pro 560 was released on April 17, 2017, and is also end-of-life. It has no predecessor or successor listed in the data.

Feature support differs meaningfully. The Tesla K80 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Radeon Pro 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The higher DirectX and Vulkan versions on the AMD card indicate better compatibility with modern graphics APIs, which can be crucial for certain professional applications. Neither GPU has ray tracing cores, tensor cores, or RT cores listed, so those features are absent from both.

The transistor density numbers tell an interesting story. The Radeon Pro 560 packs 24.4 million transistors per mm², nearly double the Tesla K80’s 12.7 million per mm². This is a direct result of the newer 14 nm process versus the older 28 nm node. However, the Tesla K80’s larger die and higher transistor count (7,100 million versus 3,000 million) allow it to deliver far more compute power, even if it is less efficient per square millimeter. The architectural differences between Kepler 2.0 and GCN 4.0 are fundamental, with NVIDIA prioritizing brute-force compute and AMD focusing on efficiency and modern feature support.