AMD FirePro W7000 vs NVIDIA Tesla K40m Comparison

The AMD FirePro W7000 and NVIDIA Tesla K40m are both end-of-life professional accelerators from the 28nm era, yet they occupy fundamentally different positions in the benchmark landscape. The data shows a near-perfect statistical tie in average benchmark scores, with the FirePro W7000 at 19,905 and the Tesla K40m at 19,885, a delta of just 0.1%. However, this aggregate parity masks a clear divergence in workload suitability, with the Tesla K40m delivering a decisive victory in the only directly comparable compute test while the FirePro W7000 offers a distinct advantage in graphics-oriented tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla K40m wins the only head-to-head benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 19,885 versus the FirePro W7000's 17,808, representing a 10.4% advantage for NVIDIA. This is a compute-focused result that aligns with the Tesla K40m's architecture and feature set. The K40m packs 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, and its GK110B chip is a massive 561 mm² die containing 7,080 million transistors. Its FP32 throughput of 5.046 TFLOPS is more than double the FirePro's 2.432 TFLOPS. The Tesla K40m also brings 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, which is nearly double the FirePro's 153.6 GB/s. For raw compute throughput and memory capacity, the K40m is the unambiguous winner.

The AMD FirePro W7000, conversely, does not win a single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, yet it holds a marginal edge in the overall average benchmark score (19,905 vs 19,885). This is because the FirePro W7000 has a second benchmark result — a Geekbench Vulkan score of 22,001 — which is not present in the Tesla K40m's data set. This Vulkan result is the highest single score among both cards' available benchmarks, indicating that the W7000 has a significant advantage in Vulkan-based workloads. The FirePro W7000 also features 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, making it a viable option for multi-display graphics workstations, whereas the Tesla K40m has no display outputs at all. For professional visualization, multi-monitor setups, or any workload that leverages the Vulkan API, the FirePro W7000 is the stronger choice.

The Verdict

Pick the NVIDIA Tesla K40m if your priority is raw compute performance in OpenCL-based applications. The data is unambiguous: the K40m beats the FirePro W7000 by 10.4% in the Geekbench OpenCL test, and its specifications support this dominance. With 2,880 shading units, 5.046 TFLOPS FP32 performance, and 12 GB of memory, the K40m is built for heavy parallel computation, scientific simulation, and data-parallel tasks. Its 288.4 GB/s memory bandwidth and 210.2 GTexel/s texture rate are class-leading figures that directly translate to faster processing of large data sets. The K40m also has a higher transistor density advantage per square millimeter — 12.6M / mm² versus 13.2M / mm² for the W7000 when adjusted for die size, though the raw transistor count favors the NVIDIA part by a factor of 2.5.

Pick the AMD FirePro W7000 if your workload involves graphics rendering, display output, or Vulkan-based compute. The W7000's Vulkan score of 22,001 is the highest single benchmark result between the two cards, and its 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it the only one of the two that can drive a multi-monitor professional setup. While it trails the K40m in raw OpenCL compute, the W7000 still delivers 2.432 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 76.00 GTexel/s texture rate, which is respectable for a 150 W single-slot card. Its average benchmark score of 19,905 is actually 0.1% higher than the K40m's 19,885, meaning that in a mixed workload environment, the W7000 can hold its own. The W7000 is also substantially easier to integrate into a workstation, requiring only a single slot and a single 6-pin power connector, versus the K40m's dual-slot footprint and 245 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a decisive win for the NVIDIA Tesla K40m. The K40m scores 19,885, while the AMD FirePro W7000 scores 17,808, a delta of -10.4% for the AMD card. This is a substantial margin in a compute benchmark, and it reflects the underlying hardware differences. The K40m's 2,880 shading units process 5.046 TFLOPS, while the W7000's 1,280 shading units manage 2.432 TFLOPS. The K40m also has a 2.5x transistor advantage (7,080 million vs 2,800 million), a 2.5x texture rate advantage (210.2 GTexel/s vs 76.00 GTexel/s), and a 1.9x memory bandwidth advantage (288.4 GB/s vs 153.6 GB/s). In purely compute terms, the K40m is the superior card.

However, the aggregate picture is more nuanced. The FirePro W7000 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 22,001, which is 10.6% higher than the K40m's OpenCL score. While these are different APIs and not directly comparable, the Vulkan result demonstrates that the W7000 is not a slouch in modern graphics workloads. The average benchmark score for the W7000 is 19,905, which is 0.1% higher than the K40m's 19,885. This means that if a user's workload is evenly split between OpenCL and Vulkan, the W7000 would actually come out ahead on average. The K40m wins the compute battle, but the W7000 wins the versatility war.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W7000 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 19,905, compared to the NVIDIA Tesla K40m's 19,885, a delta of 0.1%.

Q: How much faster is the Tesla K40m in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Tesla K40m scores 19,885 versus the FirePro W7000's 17,808, making the K40m 10.4% faster in this specific benchmark.

Q: Does the FirePro W7000 have any benchmark where it outperforms the K40m?

A: The FirePro W7000 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 22,001, which is the highest single benchmark result between the two cards. The Tesla K40m has no Vulkan benchmark score recorded.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The Tesla K40m has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the FirePro W7000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, a threefold difference in capacity.

Q: Which card supports display outputs?

A: The FirePro W7000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the Tesla K40m has no display outputs.

Q: What are the launch MSRPs of these cards?

A: The AMD FirePro W7000 had a launch MSRP of 899 USD, and the NVIDIA Tesla K40m had a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD FirePro W7000 uses the Pitcairn chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA Tesla K40m uses the GK110B chip based on Kepler architecture. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the similarities end there. The Kepler chip is dramatically larger, with a die size of 561 mm² versus the Pitcairn's 212 mm². Transistor counts reflect this scale difference: the GK110B packs 7,080 million transistors, while the Pitcairn has just 2,800 million. Interestingly, the transistor density is slightly higher on the AMD chip at 13.2M / mm², versus 12.6M / mm² for the NVIDIA chip, indicating a more efficient packing of transistors on the smaller die.

The shading unit count is a major architectural divergence. The Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the FirePro W7000 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives the K40m a 2.25x advantage in shading units, a 3x advantage in TMUs, and a 1.5x advantage in ROPs. The compute throughput follows suit: the K40m delivers 5.046 TFLOPS FP32, while the W7000 delivers 2.432 TFLOPS. The K40m's pixel rate of 52.56 GPixel/s is also 73% higher than the W7000's 30.40 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 210.2 GTexel/s is 177% higher. These are not minor differences; they represent a completely different performance class for raw compute and fill-rate-heavy tasks.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal stark contrasts beyond the core architecture. The Tesla K40m has a base clock of 745 MHz and a boost clock of 876 MHz, while the FirePro W7000's base and boost clocks are not specified in the available data. Memory configuration is a major differentiator: the K40m has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the W7000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock differs as well, with the K40m running at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus the W7000's 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective).

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The Tesla K40m has a TDP of 245 W and requires a dual-slot footprint, with a length of 267 mm (10.5 inches) and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The FirePro W7000 has a TDP of 150 W, fits in a single slot, measures 242 mm (9.5 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The W7000 uses a single 6-pin power connector, while the K40m's power connector configuration is not listed. The K40m has no display outputs, while the W7000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2. Both cards support PCIe 3.0 x16, DirectX 12 (11_1), and OpenGL 4.6, but the K40m has a newer Vulkan version (1.2.175) compared to the W7000's 1.2.170. The release dates differ by about 17 months, with the W7000 launching on 2012-06-12 and the K40m on 2013-11-21.