
FirePro W7000 Adapter vs Tesla K20Xm

FirePro W7000 Adapter
Popular choices:

Tesla K20Xm
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is positioned at rank 219 and the Tesla K20Xm is on rank 100, so the Tesla K20Xm offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W7000 Adapter
Performance Per Dollar Tesla K20Xm
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla K20Xm is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score and 50% more VRAM (6 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro W7000 Adapter.
| Insight | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W7000 Adapter offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W7000 Adapter holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $7,699), it costs 100% less, resulting in a 50993.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+50993.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($7,699) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W7000 Adapter and Tesla K20Xm

FirePro W7000 Adapter
The FirePro W7000 Adapter is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 13 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 950 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,383 points. Launch price was $899.

Tesla K20Xm
The Tesla K20Xm is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 12 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 2688 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 235W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,403 points. Launch price was $7,699.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W7000 Adapter scores 4,383 and the Tesla K20Xm reaches 4,403 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is built on GCN 1.0 while the Tesla K20Xm uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,280 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 2,688 (Tesla K20Xm). Raw compute: 2.432 TFLOPS (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 3.935 TFLOPS (Tesla K20Xm).
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,383 | 4,403 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280 | 2688+110% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.432 TFLOPS | 3.935 TFLOPS+62% |
| ROPs | 32 | 48+50% |
| TMUs | 80 | 224+180% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+43% | 224 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1.5 MB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro W7000 Adapter comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla K20Xm has 6 GB. The Tesla K20Xm offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 1.5 MB (Tesla K20Xm) — the Tesla K20Xm has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 6 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1.5 MB+200% |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W7000 Adapter draws 150W versus the Tesla K20Xm's 235W — a 44.2% difference. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 350W (Tesla K20Xm). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-36% | 235W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 242mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 90°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 29.2+56% | 18.7 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W7000 Adapter launched at $899 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the Tesla K20Xm launched at $7699.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | Tesla K20Xm |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $899-88% | $7699 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | — |
| Codename | Pitcairn | GK110 |
| Release | June 13 2012 | November 12 2012 |
| Ranking | #477 | #473 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











