AMD Radeon R9 280X vs NVIDIA Tesla K20m

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 280X and NVIDIA Tesla K20m videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, Geekbench - OpenCL.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280X

• Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
• Around 16% better floating-point performance: 4,096 gflops vs 3,524 gflops
• Around 40% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6211 vs 4432
• 3.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 686 vs 210
• Around 62% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 89.187 vs 54.89
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1434.496 vs 1414.755
• Around 44% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 7.656 vs 5.303
• Around 4% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 87.459 vs 83.807
• Around 97% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 493.57 vs 250.291
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9603 vs 8319
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9603 vs 8319

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla K20m

• Around 15% higher texture fill rate: 146.8 GTexel / s vs 128.0 GTexel / s
• Around 22% higher pipelines: 2496 vs 2048
• Around 11% lower typical power consumption: 225 Watt vs 250 Watt
• Around 67% higher maximum memory size: 5 GB vs 3 GB
• Around 98% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7337 vs 3700
• 3.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 10873 vs 3357
• Around 98% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7337 vs 3700
• 3.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 10873 vs 3357

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 280X
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla K20m

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	6211 4432
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	686 210
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	89.187 54.89
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1434.496 1414.755
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.656 5.303
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	87.459 83.807
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	493.57 250.291
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9603 8319
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3700 7337
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 10873
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9603 8319
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3700 7337
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 10873

Compare specifications (specs)