AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs NVIDIA Tesla K40m Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In that measurement, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m scores 19,885, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 18,268. This gives the Tesla K40m a decisive win by 8.1%, a margin that is clearly reflected in the recorded data.

The Tesla K40m also holds a higher average benchmark score across all its recorded tests, at 19,885, which is its only benchmark score listed. The Radeon Pro Vega 16, by contrast, has a higher average benchmark score of 23,250, but this is pulled up by its additional Geekbench Metal and Vulkan scores, which the Tesla K40m does not have recorded. In the only test where both cards appear, the OpenCL result, the Tesla K40m is the clear winner.

Looking at the percentile rankings, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 sits at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, while the Tesla K40m is at the 65th percentile. This indicates that while the AMD card is overall better positioned in the database, the NVIDIA card is competitive and slightly ahead in the shared workload.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a notable advantage in its best-case benchmark, the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 29,650. This is its highest score and indicates strong performance in Apple-centric Metal workloads. Its Vulkan score of 21,832 is also respectable. The Tesla K40m, however, lacks any recorded Metal or Vulkan scores, meaning those workloads are not measured for this card.

When comparing the two directly on OpenCL, the Tesla K40m outperforms the Radeon Pro Vega 16 by a margin that is meaningful but not enormous. The delta of 8.1% suggests that the NVIDIA card is faster in general compute tasks, but the AMD card is not far behind.

The nearest rivals for the Radeon Pro Vega 16 show it is closely matched with a group of cards. Its average score of 23,250 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, a 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23,273, a -0.1% delta). This indicates that the Radeon Pro Vega 16's overall performance is near the middle of a cluster of similar GPUs, with the AMD Radeon R9 M290X (23,276) and AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 (23,315) also within 0.3% of its average.

For the Tesla K40m, its nearest rivals are led by the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905, a -0.1% delta), meaning the Tesla K40m is slightly ahead of that card. It also leads the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765, a 0.6% delta) and the AMD FirePro D300 (19,637, a 1.3% delta) by small margins. The NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602) is 1.4% behind. These deltas show that the Tesla K40m, while not a top-tier card today, still holds a small but consistent edge over several similarly aged workstation GPUs.

In summary, the head-to-head data is limited but clear: the Tesla K40m wins the OpenCL benchmark by 8.1%, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a higher overall average due to additional benchmark types. The single shared test is the deciding factor in this direct comparison.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m is the faster card in the only benchmark where both are measured. Its OpenCL score of 19,885 beats the Radeon Pro Vega 16's 18,268 by 8.1%. Any user or workload that relies on OpenCL compute should prefer the Tesla K40m based on this result alone.

However, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a broader benchmark profile. Its average score of 23,250 is higher than the Tesla K40m's 19,885, but this is due to the Metal and Vulkan tests that the NVIDIA card does not have recorded. If the workload involves Metal (common in macOS environments) or Vulkan, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the only one of the two with measured performance in those areas, and its scores are strong.

The Tesla K40m also has a major capacity advantage with 12 GB of memory versus 4 GB on the Radeon Pro Vega 16. For large datasets or compute tasks that require significant memory, the Tesla K40m is the practical choice. The Radeon Pro Vega 16's 4 GB is limiting for modern workloads.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is a 75 W part with an integrated form factor (IGP), while the Tesla K40m is a 245 W dual-slot card requiring a 550 W power supply. The data does not include performance per watt, but the power draw difference is stark. For systems with tight power budgets, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the only realistic option.

The verdict is straightforward: for pure compute performance in OpenCL, the Tesla K40m wins. For versatility across API types (Metal, Vulkan) and lower power consumption, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is preferable. The Tesla K40m also wins on memory capacity. The database shows one clear head-to-head win for NVIDIA and zero for AMD.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on very different architectures and process nodes. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m uses the Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC. The AMD card is newer, released in November 2018, while the Tesla K40m was released in November 2013.

The Tesla K40m has a significantly larger die: 561 mm² with 7,080 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The Radeon Pro Vega 16 does not have its die size or transistor count listed in the database. This makes direct physical comparison impossible, but the Tesla's die is known to be large.

Memory technology differs completely. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 with a 1024-bit bus and 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla K40m uses 12 GB of GDDR5 with a 384-bit bus and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has higher bandwidth, but less capacity. The NVIDIA card has three times the memory.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has far more compute resources. This explains its higher pixel rate (52.56 GPixel/s vs 38.08 GPixel/s) and texture rate (210.2 GTexel/s vs 76.16 GTexel/s). The Tesla K40m also has much higher FP32 throughput at 5.046 TFLOPS versus 2.437 TFLOPS.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 supports FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, offering 4.874 TFLOPS, while the Tesla K40m has no recorded FP16 capability. This makes the AMD card more suitable for workloads that use half-precision. The Tesla K40m lacks any FP16 support in the database.

API support differs as well. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Tesla K40m supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The AMD card has a slightly newer DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

The bus interface is the same for both: PCIe 3.0 x16. The Tesla K40m has no display outputs, making it a compute-only card. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning its outputs depend on the host system.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40m has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 4 GB of HBM2. The Tesla K40m has three times the capacity.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a TDP of 75 W and is an integrated part (IGP). The Tesla K40m has a TDP of 245 W and is a dual-slot card requiring a 550 W power supply.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 307.2 GB/s of bandwidth from its 1024-bit HBM2 bus. The Tesla K40m has 288.4 GB/s from a 384-bit GDDR5 bus. The AMD card is ahead by roughly 19 GB/s.

Q: Does the Tesla K40m support FP16?

A: No. The database lists no FP16 capability for the Tesla K40m. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 offers 4.874 TFLOPS of FP16 performance with a 2:1 ratio.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units versus 1,024 on the Radeon Pro Vega 16. The NVIDIA card also has more TMUs (240 vs 64) and ROPs (48 vs 32).

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Tesla K40m?

A: The launch MSRP is 7,699 USD. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has no launch MSRP listed in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla K40m wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 19,885 beats the Radeon Pro Vega 16's 18,268 by 8.1%. It also has significantly higher FP32 throughput (5.046 TFLOPS vs 2.437 TFLOPS), higher pixel rate (52.56 GPixel/s vs 38.08 GPixel/s), and higher texture rate (210.2 GTexel/s vs 76.16 GTexel/s). For any task that is compute-bound and uses OpenCL, the Tesla K40m is the clear winner.

The Tesla K40m also wins on memory capacity. With 12 GB versus 4 GB, it can hold larger datasets in memory, which is critical for machine learning training, scientific simulations, or large 3D rendering scenes. Its lower bandwidth (288.4 GB/s vs 307.2 GB/s) is a minor disadvantage, but capacity is often more important than raw speed.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 wins in API coverage. It has recorded scores in Geekbench Metal (29,650) and Vulkan (21,832), neither of which the Tesla K40m has. For macOS users leveraging Metal, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the only option with data. For Vulkan workloads, it also has a measured score, while the Tesla K40m does not.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 wins on power efficiency. At 75 W, it uses a fraction of the Tesla K40m's 245 W. It is also an integrated part, requiring no separate power connectors, while the Tesla K40m needs a 550 W power supply. For portable devices or systems with limited power, the AMD card is the only sensible choice.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 also wins on FP16 support. It offers 4.874 TFLOPS of half-precision performance, while the Tesla K40m has none. This makes the AMD card useful for AI inference or other workloads that leverage FP16.

In terms of overall positioning, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla K40m is at the 65th. This suggests that the AMD card has a slight edge in the broader database, despite losing the direct OpenCL test.

Finally, the Tesla K40m has a longer physical presence at 267 mm (10.5 inches), while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has no listed dimensions due to its integrated nature. The Tesla K40m has no display outputs, meaning it must be paired with another GPU for display tasks.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The process node is 14 nm for the AMD card and 28 nm for the NVIDIA card. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses GCN 5.0 architecture, while the Tesla K40m uses Kepler.

Clocks differ: the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a base clock of 815 MHz and a boost of 1190 MHz. The Tesla K40m has a base of 745 MHz and a boost of 876 MHz. The AMD card has higher clocks, but the NVIDIA card has far more cores.

Memory is a major differentiator. The AMD card has 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources: the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Tesla K40m also has higher pixel rate (52.56 vs 38.08 GPixel/s) and texture rate (210.2 vs 76.16 GTexel/s).

FP32 performance: 2.437 TFLOPS for AMD versus 5.046 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16: 4.874 TFLOPS for AMD, none for NVIDIA.

TDP: 75 W for AMD, 245 W for NVIDIA. Slot width: IGP for AMD, dual-slot for NVIDIA. The Tesla K40m requires a 550 W power supply; the AMD card has no listed PSU requirement.

The Tesla K40m has a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has none listed. The Tesla K40m has a die size of 561 mm² and 7,080 million transistors, while the AMD card has none listed.

API support: AMD has DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.3. NVIDIA has DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.175. Display outputs: AMD is portable-device dependent, NVIDIA has no outputs.

Release dates: AMD was released November 2018, NVIDIA was released November 2013. Both are end-of-life. The Tesla K40m's predecessor is Tesla Fermi and successor is Tesla Maxwell. The AMD card has no listed predecessor or successor.