AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs NVIDIA Tesla K40c Comparison

# NVIDIA Tesla K40c vs AMD Radeon PRO W7500

The NVIDIA Tesla K40c and AMD Radeon PRO W7500 represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by a decade of architectural evolution. The K40c, built on Kepler architecture and released in late 2013, was a compute-focused accelerator with no display outputs, while the W7500, an RDNA 3.0 part from 2023, is a modern workstation GPU with full display capabilities. Benchmark data shows the W7500 delivers 58,213 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the K40c's 17,468, a 70% delta in favor of the newer card, yet the K40c still holds a slightly higher percentile ranking at 61 compared to the W7500's 59 due to differing benchmark distributions.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher raw compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32, more than double the Tesla K40c's 5.046 TFLOPS. In the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, the W7500 scores 58,213 versus 17,468 for the K40c, reflecting a -70% delta in favor of the AMD card.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The Tesla K40c has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon PRO W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Despite having less capacity and a narrower bus, the W7500's faster memory clock (16 Gbps effective vs 6 Gbps) keeps bandwidth within 11% of the K40c.

Q: What are the power and physical requirements?

A: The K40c is a dual-slot card with a 245 W TDP, requiring one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. The W7500 is a single-slot card with a 70 W TDP, needs no power connectors, and runs on a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The Radeon PRO W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The Tesla K40c supports DirectX 12 (11_0), Vulkan 1.2.175, and OpenGL 4.6. The W7500's DirectX 12 Ultimate and newer Vulkan version provide more complete modern API coverage.

Q: Do both cards have display outputs?

A: No. The Tesla K40c has no display outputs, making it strictly a compute accelerator. The Radeon PRO W7500 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, enabling direct display connectivity.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The Tesla K40c is end-of-life, released in October 2013 with a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD. The Radeon PRO W7500 is active, released in August 2023 with a launch MSRP of 429 USD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The Tesla K40c uses the GK180 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, packing 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die. The Radeon PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process, fitting 13,300 million transistors into just 204 mm². This represents a transistor density jump from 12.6M per mm² to 65.2M per mm² — over a fivefold increase in density.

The K40c's Kepler architecture features 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The W7500's RDNA 3.0 architecture has fewer shading units at 1,792, fewer TMUs at 112, but more ROPs at 64. Critically, the W7500 includes 28 ray tracing cores, while the K40c has no RT cores at all. Neither card has tensor cores. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the K40c runs at 745 MHz base and 876 MHz boost, while the W7500 operates at 1,500 MHz base and 1,700 MHz boost.

The memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The K40c uses 12 GB GDDR5 with a 384-bit bus, while the W7500 uses 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The newer GDDR6 memory operates at 16 Gbps effective versus 6 Gbps for GDDR5. The K40c achieves higher bandwidth (288.4 GB/s vs 256.0 GB/s) due to its much wider bus, but the W7500's memory runs on a newer, more power-efficient standard.

Rates reflect the architectural changes. The K40c produces 52.56 GPixel/s pixel rate and 210.2 GTexel/s texture rate. The W7500 produces 108.8 GPixel/s pixel rate — more than double — but a slightly lower 190.4 GTexel/s texture rate. FP16 capability exists only on the W7500 at 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the K40c lists no FP16 support. The K40c connects via PCIe 3.0 x16, while the W7500 uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The Verdict

The data points to distinct use cases for each card. The Radeon PRO W7500 is the clear performance winner in compute workloads, delivering 58,213 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 17,468 for the K40c, a 70% advantage. Its higher FP32 throughput (12.19 TFLOPS vs 5.046 TFLOPS), doubled pixel rate (108.8 vs 52.56 GPixel/s), and inclusion of ray tracing cores make it architecturally superior for modern workloads. The W7500 also offers display outputs, a huge practical advantage for workstation use.

However, the Tesla K40c retains one significant edge: memory capacity. With 12 GB versus 8 GB, the K40c can accommodate larger datasets in VRAM, and its 288.4 GB/s bandwidth exceeds the W7500's 256.0 GB/s. For workloads that are capacity-bound rather than compute-bound, the K40c's larger frame buffer remains relevant. The K40c also holds a marginally higher percentile ranking (61 vs 59), though this reflects its position among all GPUs at the time of benchmarking rather than direct comparison.

The production statuses are decisive. The K40c is end-of-life, a legacy part from 2013 with no display outputs and a 245 W TDP. The W7500 is active, current, and dramatically more efficient at 70 W. For any new deployment, the Radeon PRO W7500 is the logical choice based on raw performance, modern features, efficiency, and active support. The K40c only makes sense for specific legacy compute tasks where 12 GB capacity is mandatory and performance per watt is not a concern.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla K40c | AMD Radeon PRO W7500 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 745 MHz | 1,500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 876 MHz | 1,700 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 6 Gbps effective | 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2,880 | 1,792 |

| TMUs | 240 | 112 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| RT Cores | None | 28 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.56 GPixel/s | 108.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 210.2 GTexel/s | 190.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.046 TFLOPS | 12.19 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | None | 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 245 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm (10.5 in) | 216 mm (8.5 in) x 115 mm (4.5 in) x 20 mm (0.8 in) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2013-10-07 | 2023-08-02 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between these two cards is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The Radeon PRO W7500 scores 58,213, while the Tesla K40c scores 17,468. This represents a -70% delta from the W7500's perspective, meaning the K40c achieves only 30% of the W7500's score. This single data point aligns with the theoretical compute specifications: the W7500's 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 is roughly 2.4 times the K40c's 5.046 TFLOPS, and the benchmark ratio of 3.33 times suggests the W7500's architectural efficiency compounds its raw throughput advantage.

The W7500's other benchmark results provide additional context for its capabilities. In PassMark G3D, it scores 13,368, with a GPU compute score of 5,910. DirectX 9 performance shows 200, DirectX 10 at 65, DirectX 11 at 125, and DirectX 12 at 46. The G2D score is 1,174. These figures indicate the W7500's strongest relative showing in older DirectX 9 workloads, while its DirectX 12 score of 46 is notably lower — possibly reflecting driver maturity or workload characteristics rather than raw hardware capability.

Looking at nearest rivals for context, the K40c's 17,468 OpenCL score sits within 2% of the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17,509), AMD Radeon Pro 560 (17,551), and AMD Radeon 780M (17,588), and within 1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639). This clustering indicates the K40c's compute performance is roughly comparable to modern integrated and entry-level discrete GPUs, despite its age and high power draw. The W7500's 58,213 OpenCL score places it near the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16,408), AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16,361), AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (16,351), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16,504) in its nearest rivals list, though these are average scores from different benchmark suites. The W7500's percentile ranking of 59 versus the K40c's 61 suggests that while the newer card is faster in absolute terms, the K40c's score distribution places it slightly higher relative to its contemporary GPU landscape.