Tesla K20Xm
VS
Radeon R7 370

Tesla K20Xm vs Radeon R7 370

NVIDIA

Tesla K20Xm

2012Core: 732 MHz
VS
AMD

Radeon R7 370

2015Boost: 975 MHz

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 K20Xm is positioned at rank #100 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Tesla K20Xm

#52
RTX A1000
MSRP: $749|Avg: $500
98%
#54
Radeon Pro 5700
MSRP: $799|Avg: $250
98%
#55
Quadro P4000
MSRP: $815|Avg: $290
96%
#57
Quadro RTX 3000
MSRP: $800|Avg: $891
92%
#58
RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1700
90%
#59
Radeon Vega Frontier Edition
MSRP: $999|Avg: $150
87%
#85
Tesla K20m
MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55
1006%
#100
Tesla K20Xm
MSRP: $7699|Avg: N/A
100%
#105
Quadro T2000 (móvel)
MSRP: $500|Avg: $150
95%
#111
Quadro P520
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
92%
#113
Radeon Pro WX 3100
MSRP: $199|Avg: $65
88%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R7 370 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Tesla K20Xm offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

InsightTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%)
Leading raw performance (+1.8%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
✅ More VRAM (+200%)
❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon R7 370 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 370 holds the technical lead. Priced at $51 (vs $7,699), it costs 99% less, resulting in a 15266.9% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+15266.9%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($7,699)
More affordable ($51)

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 K20Xm and Radeon R7 370

NVIDIA

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.

AMD

Radeon R7 370

The Radeon R7 370 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 18 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 975 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,482 points. Launch price was $149.

Graphics Performance

The Tesla K20Xm scores 4,403 and the Radeon R7 370 reaches 4,482 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla K20Xm is built on Kepler while the Radeon R7 370 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,688 (Tesla K20Xm) vs 1,024 (Radeon R7 370). Raw compute: 3.935 TFLOPS (Tesla K20Xm) vs 1.997 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 370).

FeatureTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
G3D Mark Score
4,403
4,482+2%
Architecture
Kepler
GCN 1.0
Process Node
28 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
2688+163%
1024
Compute (TFLOPS)
3.935 TFLOPS+97%
1.997 TFLOPS
ROPs
48+50%
32
TMUs
224+250%
64
L1 Cache
224 KB
256 KB+14%
L2 Cache
1.5 MB+200%
0.5 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
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)

The Tesla K20Xm comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 370 has 2 GB. The Tesla K20Xm offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Tesla K20Xm) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R7 370) — the Tesla K20Xm has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
VRAM Capacity
6 GB+200%
2 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
64-bit
256-bit+300%
L2 Cache
1.5 MB+200%
0.5 MB
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Tesla K20Xm draws 235W versus the Radeon R7 370's 100W — a 80.6% difference. The Radeon R7 370 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla K20Xm) vs 450W (Radeon R7 370). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.

FeatureTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
TDP
235W
100W-57%
Recommended PSU
350W-22%
450W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
1x 6-pin
Length
221mm
Slots
2
Perf/Watt
18.7
44.8+140%
💰

Value Analysis

The Tesla K20Xm launched at $7699 MSRP, while the Radeon R7 370 launched at $149 and now averages $51. The Radeon R7 370 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).

FeatureTesla K20XmRadeon R7 370
MSRP
$7699
$149-98%
Avg Price (30d)
$51
Codename
GK110
Trinidad
Release
November 12 2012
June 18 2015
Ranking
#473
#467