Tesla K20m vs Radeon R9 270
Tesla K20m
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 270
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. The Tesla K20m is positioned at rank #1 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Tesla K20m
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla K20m is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 270.
| Insight | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 270 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 270 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $55), it costs 45% less, resulting in a 78.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+78.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($55) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
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 Tesla K20m and Radeon R9 270
Tesla K20m
The Tesla K20m is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 5 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 2496 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,432 points. Launch price was $3,199.
Radeon R9 270
The Radeon R9 270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 925 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,306 points. Launch price was $179.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla K20m scores 4,432 and the Radeon R9 270 reaches 4,306 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla K20m is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 270 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,496 (Tesla K20m) vs 1,280 (Radeon R9 270). Raw compute: 3.524 TFLOPS (Tesla K20m) vs 2.368 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 270).
| Feature | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,432+3% | 4,306 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2496+95% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.524 TFLOPS+49% | 2.368 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 40+25% | 32 |
| TMUs | 208+160% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 208 KB | 320 KB+54% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB+150% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.25 MB (Tesla K20m) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 270) — the Tesla K20m has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB+150% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla K20m draws 225W versus the Radeon R9 270's 150W — a 40% difference. The Radeon R9 270 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla K20m) vs 500W (Radeon R9 270). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 150W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Perf/Watt | 19.7 | 28.7+46% |
Value Analysis
The Tesla K20m launched at $3199 MSRP and currently averages $55, while the Radeon R9 270 launched at $179 and now averages $30. The Radeon R9 270 costs 45.5% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 80.6 (Tesla K20m) vs 143.5 (Radeon R9 270) — the Radeon R9 270 offers 78% better value.
| Feature | Tesla K20m | Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3199 | $179-94% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $55 | $30-45% |
| Performance per Dollar | 80.6 | 143.5+78% |
| Codename | GK110 | Curacao |
| Release | January 5 2013 | November 13 2013 |
| Ranking | #470 | #476 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla K20m and Radeon R9 270
