NVIDIA Tesla K20m vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Tesla K20m and NVIDIA Quadro 5000M 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, 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 - 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Tesla K20m
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 74% higher core clock speed: 706 MHz vs 405 MHz
- 9.1x more texture fill rate: 146.8 GTexel / s vs 16.2 GTexel / s
- 7.8x more pipelines: 2496 vs 320
- 6.8x better floating-point performance: 3,524 gflops vs 518.4 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 2.9x more maximum memory size: 5 GB vs 1792 MB
- 2.2x more memory clock speed: 5200 MHz vs 2400 MHz
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4432 vs 2060
- Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7337 vs 5249
- Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 10873 vs 7205
- Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7337 vs 5249
- Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 10873 vs 7205
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 January 2013 vs 27 July 2010 |
| Core clock speed | 706 MHz vs 405 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 146.8 GTexel / s vs 16.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2496 vs 320 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,524 gflops vs 518.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 5 GB vs 1792 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 5200 MHz vs 2400 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4432 vs 2060 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7337 vs 5249 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 10873 vs 7205 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7337 vs 5249 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 10873 vs 7205 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 5000M
- 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 225 Watt
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 426 vs 210
- Around 59% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 23008 vs 14510
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 225 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 426 vs 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 23008 vs 14510 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla K20m
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 5000M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Tesla K20m | NVIDIA Quadro 5000M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4432 | 2060 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 210 | 426 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14510 | 23008 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.89 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1414.755 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.303 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 83.807 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 250.291 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8319 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7337 | 5249 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 10873 | 7205 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8319 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7337 | 5249 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 10873 | 7205 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Tesla K20m | NVIDIA Quadro 5000M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
| Code name | GK110 | GF100 |
| Launch date | 5 January 2013 | 27 July 2010 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,199 | |
| Place in performance rating | 418 | 419 |
| Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 706 MHz | 405 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,524 gflops | 518.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 2496 | 320 |
| Texture fill rate | 146.8 GTexel / s | 16.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 7,080 million | 3,100 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
| Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 5 GB | 1792 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 208.0 GB / s | 76.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 320 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5200 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| ECC (Error Correcting Code) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Tesla K20m with others
NVIDIATesla K20m vs
ATIRadeon X800 SE
NVIDIATesla K20m vs
ATIRadeon X1650 GTO
NVIDIATesla K20m vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 540v
NVIDIATesla K20m vs
NVIDIAQuadro 5000M
NVIDIATesla K20m vs
AMDRadeon HD 7990
NVIDIATesla K20m vs
AMDRadeon R7 370
