AMD Radeon R9 M275 vs NVIDIA Tesla K20c
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 M275 and NVIDIA Tesla K20c videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M275
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 27% higher core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 706 MHz
Launch date | 28 January 2014 vs 12 November 2012 |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 706 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla K20c
- 4x more texture fill rate: 146.8 GTexel / s vs 37 GTexel / s
- 3.9x more pipelines: 2496 vs 640
- 3x better floating-point performance: 3,524 gflops vs 1,184 gflops
- 2.5x more maximum memory size: 5 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 30% higher memory clock speed: 5200 MHz vs 4000 MHz
- Around 69% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 15597 vs 9231
- Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 39.423 vs 28.064
- 4.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1427.15 vs 313.463
- Around 87% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.128 vs 2.206
- Around 87% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 64.383 vs 34.381
- Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 179.044 vs 121.685
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 146.8 GTexel / s vs 37 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2496 vs 640 |
Floating-point performance | 3,524 gflops vs 1,184 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 5 GB vs 2 GB |
Memory clock speed | 5200 MHz vs 4000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 15597 vs 9231 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.423 vs 28.064 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1427.15 vs 313.463 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.128 vs 2.206 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.383 vs 34.381 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 179.044 vs 121.685 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M275
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla K20c
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R9 M275 | NVIDIA Tesla K20c |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1115 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 569 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9231 | 15597 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.064 | 39.423 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 313.463 | 1427.15 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.206 | 4.128 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.381 | 64.383 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 121.685 | 179.044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1162 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1717 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1162 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1717 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R9 M275 | NVIDIA Tesla K20c | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
Code name | Venus | GK110 |
Launch date | 28 January 2014 | 12 November 2012 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $799.99 | $3,199 |
Place in performance rating | 1005 | 1006 |
Price now | $699.99 | |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Value for money (0-100) | 3.01 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 925 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 706 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,184 gflops | 3,524 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 2496 |
Texture fill rate | 37 GTexel / s | 146.8 GTexel / s |
Transistor count | 1,500 million | 7,080 million |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | large | |
Length | 267 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 5 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 64 GB / s | 208.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 320 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 5200 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 |