AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla K40m Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a decisive outcome: the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT is the superior compute performer in this pairing. In the single available head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD card scores 59,467 against the NVIDIA Tesla K40m’s 19,885, a difference of 199% in favor of AMD, with the deltaPct showing the Tesla trailing by 66.6%. This is not a marginal victory; it is a generational gap in raw throughput.

However, the intended use cases for these two cards are distinct. The Tesla K40m, with its 12 GB of memory and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth, is a compute-oriented accelerator from 2013, designed for tasks where large memory pools matter more than peak speed. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT, with 16 GB of memory and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth, is a much newer, denser, and more efficient part. For any workload that relies on the specific APIs or drivers optimized for Metal (where the AMD card scores 51,272) or Vulkan (56,593), the AMD is the only logical choice — the Tesla has no such benchmark results listed.

Strictly from the data, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT should be chosen for all modern compute tasks, especially those leveraging OpenCL, Vulkan, or Metal. The Tesla K40m should only be considered if the software stack is locked to the Kepler architecture’s legacy support, or if the specific 12 GB frame buffer (which is smaller than AMD’s 16 GB) is a hard requirement. There are no benchmark wins for the Tesla K40m in this dataset; it wins zero tests, while AMD wins one. The verdict is unambiguous.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a single benchmark category where both cards were tested: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT wins this outright with 59,467 points. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m produces 19,885 points, which is 66.6% lower.

Beyond that direct comparison, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT has additional benchmark results that suggest its strengths in specific API environments. It scores 51,272 in Geekbench Metal and 56,593 in Geekbench Vulkan, both indicating robust performance in Apple-centric and cross-platform graphics compute environments. Its Passmark scores further detail its capabilities: 12,547 in G3D, 5,787 in GPU Compute, and notably high legacy results like 153 in DirectX 9 and 85 in DirectX 11. These numbers, while not directly comparable to the Tesla (which has no such entries), paint a picture of a versatile processor.

The Tesla K40m has no wins in any recorded benchmark. Its only data point is the Geekbench OpenCL score, where it loses. Consequently, there is no use case where the data supports choosing the Tesla based on performance metrics. The AMD card’s higher FP32 throughput (7.675 TFLOPS vs. 5.046 TFLOPS) and higher pixel rate (95.94 GPixel/s vs. 52.56 GPixel/s) reinforce this, though those are specification differences rather than benchmark wins. In every measurable way, the AMD part wins the performance race.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras and philosophies. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m is built on the Kepler architecture, using the GK110B chip, and is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 7,080 million transistors on a die size of 561 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, also manufactured by TSMC, but on a significantly more advanced 7 nm process. This node allows AMD to pack 10,300 million transistors into a much smaller 251 mm² die, achieving a density of 41.0M per mm² — more than triple the density of the NVIDIA chip.

The core configurations differ markedly. The Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 render output units (ROPs). The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. While the Tesla has more shading units and TMUs, the AMD card compensates with higher clock speeds: a base of 1,243 MHz and boost of 1,499 MHz, compared to the Tesla’s 745 MHz base and 876 MHz boost.

Memory subsystems are also divergent. The Tesla uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, providing 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding a higher 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card also supports FP16 compute at 15.35 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature the Tesla does not list. API support differs as well: the Tesla supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Power and physical characteristics show the generational efficiency leap. The Tesla K40m has a TDP of 245 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, occupying a dual-slot form factor. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT has a TDP of just 130 W, a suggested PSU of 300 W, and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors. The Tesla is 267 mm long (10.5 inches), while the AMD has no listed dimensions. The bus interface also upgrades from PCIe 3.0 x16 on the Tesla to PCIe 4.0 x16 on the AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 59,467, while the NVIDIA Tesla K40m scores 19,885. The AMD card is ahead by 199%, with the Tesla showing a deltaPct of -66.6% relative to the AMD winner.

Q: What is the memory capacity and type difference?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40m has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus. The AMD card also has higher bandwidth at 384.0 GB/s versus 288.4 GB/s.

Q: How do their TDPs compare?

A: The Tesla K40m has a TDP of 245 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 300 W suggested PSU, making it significantly more power-efficient.

Q: Which card supports newer PCIe and API standards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: What are the FP32 and FP16 compute capabilities?

A: The Tesla K40m delivers 5.046 TFLOPS FP32 and has no listed FP16 capability. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT delivers 7.675 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.35 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, which is more than the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT’s 2,560. However, the AMD card’s higher clock speeds result in higher overall FP32 throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT produces a score of 59,467. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m produces 19,885. The deltaPct indicates the Tesla loses by 66.6%, meaning the AMD card is roughly three times faster in this workload.

This is the single biggest win in the dataset, and it is comprehensive. The AMD card’s score is not just higher; it is in a different performance class. For context, the Tesla K40m’s nearest rivals in the overall database include the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905, deltaPct -0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765, deltaPct 0.6%), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602, deltaPct 1.4%). The Tesla sits firmly in the 19,000-20,000 score range, which is consistent with its 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT’s nearest rivals are different. Its average benchmark score is 18,685, which is lower than its OpenCL score alone, indicating that other benchmarks (like some Passmark tests) pull the average down. Its rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (18,789, deltaPct -0.6%), the Tesla K80 (18,866, deltaPct -1%), and the AMD Radeon RX 560X (18,626, deltaPct 0.3%). The AMD card ranks at the 63rd percentile.

The head-to-head delta is stark: the AMD card’s OpenCL score of 59,467 dwarfs the Tesla’s 19,885. Even when considering the AMD card’s other API results — 51,272 in Metal and 56,593 in Vulkan — the pattern is clear. The AMD architecture, with its 7 nm process and RDNA 1.0 design, delivers compute performance that the older Kepler chip cannot approach. The Tesla’s advantage in shading unit count (2,880 vs. 2,560) does not translate into real-world wins due to its much lower clock speeds and older memory technology.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every fundamental specification.

• Process Node: NVIDIA uses 28 nm; AMD uses 7 nm.
• Transistors: NVIDIA has 7,080 million; AMD has 10,300 million.
• Die Size: NVIDIA is 561 mm²; AMD is 251 mm².
• Transistor Density: NVIDIA is 12.6M / mm²; AMD is 41.0M / mm².
• Base Clock: NVIDIA is 745 MHz; AMD is 1,243 MHz.
• Boost Clock: NVIDIA is 876 MHz; AMD is 1,499 MHz.
• Memory Clock: NVIDIA is 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective); AMD is 1,500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: NVIDIA is 12 GB; AMD is 16 GB.
• Memory Type: NVIDIA is GDDR5; AMD is GDDR6.
• Memory Bus Width: NVIDIA is 384 bit; AMD is 256 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: NVIDIA is 288.4 GB/s; AMD is 384.0 GB/s.
• Shading Units: NVIDIA has 2,880; AMD has 2,560.
• TMUs: NVIDIA has 240; AMD has 160.
• ROPs: NVIDIA has 48; AMD has 64.
• Pixel Rate: NVIDIA is 52.56 GPixel/s; AMD is 95.94 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: NVIDIA is 210.2 GTexel/s; AMD is 239.8 GTexel/s.
• FP32: NVIDIA is 5.046 TFLOPS; AMD is 7.675 TFLOPS.
• FP16: NVIDIA has none listed; AMD is 15.35 TFLOPS (2:1).
• TDP: NVIDIA is 245 W; AMD is 130 W.
• Slot Width: NVIDIA is Dual-slot; AMD is IGP.
• Power Connectors: NVIDIA has none listed; AMD has none.
• Suggested PSU: NVIDIA is 550 W; AMD is 300 W.
• Bus Interface: NVIDIA is PCIe 3.0 x16; AMD is PCIe 4.0 x16.
• DirectX Support: NVIDIA is 12 (11_1); AMD is 12 (12_1).
• Vulkan Support: NVIDIA is 1.2.175; AMD is 1.4.
• Dimensions: NVIDIA is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long; AMD has no listed dimensions.
• Release Date: NVIDIA is 2013-11-21; AMD is 2020-08-03.