Tesla K80m vs Radeon RX Vega 64

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking127not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation22.93no data
Power efficiency8.76no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameVega 10GK210
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date7 August 2017 (7 years ago)17 November 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores40962x 2496
Core clock speed1247 MHz562 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz824 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million7,100 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate395.82x 182.2 billion/sec
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPSno data
ROPs642x 48
TMUs2562x 208

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length279 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2x 12 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit2x 384 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz5012 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s2x 240.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12.0 (11_1)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.1.125-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 August 2017 17 November 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 300 Watt

RX Vega 64 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 64 and Tesla K80m. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 is a desktop card while Tesla K80m is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
NVIDIA Tesla K80m
Tesla K80m

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 692 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 10 votes

Rate Tesla K80m on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.