AMD Radeon RX 6800 vs NVIDIA Tesla M60 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M60 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 are two very different GPUs separated by five years of architecture evolution, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 1.3% of each other. The Tesla M60, a Maxwell-based compute accelerator from 2015, edges out the RDNA 2.0-based RX 6800 in the aggregate, but the RX 6800 dominates in modern API workloads. The data shows a clear split: the M60 wins in OpenCL compute, while the RX 6800 wins decisively in Vulkan and offers a far more feature-rich specification sheet. This is not a straightforward generational upgrade; it is a fork in the road between legacy compute acceleration and contemporary gaming-capable graphics.

The Verdict

The choice between these two cards depends entirely on the workload. For raw OpenCL compute performance, the NVIDIA Tesla M60 is the stronger pick, delivering a Geekbench OpenCL score of 29,506 versus the RX 6800’s 24,508, a 20.4% advantage. Its 75th percentile ranking among all GPUs, matching the RX 6800’s 75th percentile, shows that despite its age, it remains competitive in specific compute tasks. The M60’s 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, while modest by modern standards, are sufficient for its intended server-side compute role.

However, the AMD Radeon RX 6800 is the clear winner for any modern graphics workload, particularly Vulkan-based applications. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 115,107 is 72.7% higher than the M60’s 31,473, a staggering margin that reflects its RDNA 2.0 architecture’s superior API support and feature set. The RX 6800 also offers 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, double the capacity and over three times the bandwidth of the M60. For gaming, content creation, or any DirectX 12 Ultimate workload, the RX 6800 is the only sensible choice.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla M60 wins exclusively in the Geekbench OpenCL test. With a score of 29,506, it outperforms the RX 6800’s 24,508 by 20.4%. This suggests the M60’s Maxwell 2.0 architecture, with its 2,048 shading units and 128 texture mapping units, is well-optimized for certain types of compute tasks that leverage OpenCL. The M60’s 4.825 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while lower than the RX 6800’s 16.17 TFLOPS, appears to be used more efficiently in this specific benchmark. The M60 also holds a slight edge in average benchmark score, at 30,490 versus the RX 6800’s 30,095, a 1.3% difference that places it ahead of the RX 6800 in the nearestRivals list.

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 wins decisively in the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 115,107 against the M60’s 31,473, a 72.7% advantage. This is the single largest performance gap in the head-to-head data. The RX 6800 also wins on every specification that matters for modern rendering: it has 3,840 shading units, 60 ray tracing cores, and 96 ROPs, compared to the M60’s 2,048 shading units, no ray tracing cores, and 64 ROPs. Its pixel rate of 202.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 505.2 GTexel/s dwarf the M60’s 75.39 GPixel/s and 150.8 GTexel/s. The RX 6800’s 16.17 TFLOPS FP32 and 32.33 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) performance further cement its compute superiority in modern APIs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The NVIDIA Tesla M60 is built on the GM204 chip using the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The M60’s memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Its clocks are conservative: a 557 MHz base and 1,178 MHz boost, with memory running at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The M60 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but has no display outputs, making it a pure compute accelerator.

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 uses the Navi 21 chip with the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at the same foundry, TSMC. This process shrink allows AMD to pack 26,800 million transistors into a 520 mm² die, achieving a much higher transistor density of 51.5 million per mm². The RX 6800 features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. Its clocks are significantly higher: 1,700 MHz base, 1,815 MHz game, and 2,105 MHz boost, with memory at 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The RX 6800 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and includes 60 ray tracing cores, a feature the M60 lacks entirely. It also has a full suite of display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C.

The power requirements also differ substantially. The M60 has a 300 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector, with a suggested 700 W power supply. The RX 6800 has a lower 250 W TDP but requires two 8-pin connectors, with a suggested 600 W power supply. Both are dual-slot cards and share the same 267 mm (10.5 inches) length. The M60 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 6800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, offering double the bus bandwidth for data transfer.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better overall benchmark performance?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M60 has a higher average benchmark score of 30,490, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6800’s 30,095, a 1.3% difference in favor of the M60.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon RX 6800 better for Vulkan workloads?

A: Yes, significantly. The RX 6800 scores 115,107 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 72.7% higher than the Tesla M60’s 31,473.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla M60 have any display outputs?

A: No, the Tesla M60 has no display outputs. It is designed purely as a compute accelerator, whereas the RX 6800 has 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M60 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. The RX 6800 also has significantly higher bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon RX 6800 supports ray tracing, with 60 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA Tesla M60, based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, has no ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Tesla M60 has a 300 W TDP and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested 700 W power supply. The RX 6800 has a 250 W TDP, requires two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 600 W power supply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data reveals a stark contrast in performance characteristics. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Tesla M60 takes a commanding lead with a score of 29,506, defeating the AMD Radeon RX 6800’s 24,508 by 20.4%. This is a notable victory for the older card, suggesting that Maxwell 2.0’s compute scheduling is particularly effective in OpenCL environments. The M60’s 2,048 shading units, while fewer than the RX 6800’s 3,840, appear to achieve higher utilization in this workload. This result explains why the M60’s average benchmark score of 30,490 edges out the RX 6800’s 30,095, despite the RX 6800’s massive architectural advantages.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells an entirely different story. Here, the AMD Radeon RX 6800 crushes the NVIDIA Tesla M60 with a score of 115,107 versus 31,473, a 72.7% advantage. This is one of the largest deltas in the entire benchmark database, reflecting the RX 6800’s modern RDNA 2.0 architecture and its superior Vulkan driver implementation. The M60’s Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while supporting Vulkan 1.4, clearly struggles to leverage the API’s capabilities. The RX 6800’s 60 ray tracing cores and 16.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance provide a substantial compute foundation that the M60 cannot match in this context.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The Tesla M60’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA CMP 70HX, which scores 30,476, a 0% delta, indicating a near-identical performance level. The RX 6800 sits behind the M60 by 1.3% in the M60’s rival list, while in the RX 6800’s own rival list, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti is 0.5% behind, and the RTX 5070 Mobile is 0.6% behind. These close margins underscore that both cards occupy a similar performance tier in aggregate, but their individual strengths diverge dramatically based on the API and workload type.