AMD Radeon RX 5300M vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two GPUs by role and era. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 is a datacenter-oriented compute card built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon RX 5300M is a mobile gaming part based on RDNA 1.0. Based on the recorded benchmark results, the Tesla M40 holds a 7.3% lead over the RX 5300M in the Geekbench OpenCL test (39192 vs 36529). However, the two cards occupy different performance percentiles: the Tesla M40 sits at the 83rd percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 5300M sits at the 80th percentile. The M40's average benchmark score of 41897 places it 2.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40870) and 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41187), but 1.9% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE (42723). The RX 5300M's average score of 36529 is virtually tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (36530, 0% delta), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA T1000 (36289), and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35860), while trailing the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37157) by 1.7%.

For buyers, the choice is straightforward. The Tesla M40 is the pick for compute workloads where raw OpenCL throughput matters and where the 12 GB memory capacity and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth are beneficial. The RX 5300M is the pick for mobile deployments where the 85 W TDP and 7 nm process node are essential constraints, and where the card's 3 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient. The M40's 250 W TDP and dual-slot footprint make it unsuitable for compact systems, while the RX 5300M's lack of power connectors and portable-device-dependent outputs indicate it is designed for integration into laptops. The data does not support a universal winner; it supports a situational one.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M40 outperforms the AMD Radeon RX 5300M in the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 39192 versus 36529, a 7.3% difference. The M40's average benchmark score across all tests is 41897, while the RX 5300M's average is 36529.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Tesla M40's average score is 0.5% higher than the Tesla M40 24 GB (41707), 1.7% higher than the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41187), and 2.5% higher than the Radeon Pro 5300 (40870), but 1.9% lower than the Radeon RX 7650 GRE (42723). The RX 5300M's average score is effectively tied with the GeForce GTX TITAN X (36530), 0.7% higher than the T1000 (36289), and 1.9% higher than the Radeon Pro Duo (35860), but 1.7% lower than the Radeon PRO W6400 (37157).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The Tesla M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5300M has 3 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, yielding 168.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient according to the database?

A: The RX 5300M has a TDP of 85 W, while the Tesla M40 has a TDP of 250 W. The RX 5300M also uses a 7 nm process node compared to the M40's 28 nm node, and it has no power connectors, whereas the M40 requires an 8-pin EPS connector and a 600 W suggested PSU.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two?

A: The Tesla M40 uses the GM200 chip on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The M40 has 8,000 million transistors on a 601 mm² die, while the RX 5300M has 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die.

Q: Which card has more compute units?

A: The Tesla M40 has 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operations pipelines. The RX 5300M has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operations pipelines.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies from their respective manufacturers. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture using the GM200 chip, a large datacenter-oriented design fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 14 chip, a compact mobile-focused design on a 7 nm process, also from TSMC.

The transistor counts and die sizes highlight the divergence. The M40 packs 8,000 million transistors onto a 601 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 5300M integrates 6,400 million transistors onto a 158 mm² die, achieving a much higher transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter. This density difference directly reflects the process node gap: 28 nm versus 7 nm.

Compute resources differ significantly. The M40 features 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The RX 5300M has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Neither card includes dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as both predate those specialized units in their respective product lines.

The memory subsystems also diverge architecturally. The M40 uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, while the RX 5300M uses 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus. The M40's memory clock is 1502 MHz with 6 Gbps effective data rate, while the RX 5300M's memory clock is 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective. The wider bus on the M40 yields higher bandwidth despite the older memory type.

The RX 5300M supports FP16 computation at 8.138 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio relative to its FP32 performance of 4.069 TFLOPS. The M40 does not list FP16 capabilities in the database, indicating its compute focus is on FP32, which is rated at 6.832 TFLOPS. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear distinctions between the two cards across every major category.

Process and die: The M40 uses a 28 nm process with a 601 mm² die and 8,000 million transistors. The RX 5300M uses a 7 nm process with a 158 mm² die and 6,400 million transistors. Transistor density is 13.3 million per mm² for the M40 versus 40.5 million per mm² for the RX 5300M.

Clocks: The M40 has a base clock of 948 MHz and a boost clock of 1112 MHz. The RX 5300M has a base clock of 1000 MHz, a game clock of 1181 MHz, and a boost clock of 1445 MHz.

Memory: The M40 has 12 GB GDDR5 with a 384-bit bus and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5300M has 3 GB GDDR6 with a 96-bit bus and 168.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks differ: 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the M40 versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the RX 5300M.

Compute throughput: The M40 delivers 106.8 GPixel/s pixel rate, 213.5 GTexel/s texture rate, and 6.832 TFLOPS FP32. The RX 5300M delivers 46.24 GPixel/s, 127.2 GTexel/s, 4.069 TFLOPS FP32, and 8.138 TFLOPS FP16.

Power and physical: The M40 has a 250 W TDP, is dual-slot, uses an 8-pin EPS power connector, requires a 600 W suggested PSU, and measures 267 mm in length. The RX 5300M has an 85 W TDP, no power connectors, no suggested PSU rating, and no listed dimensions.

Interface and outputs: The M40 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and has no display outputs. The RX 5300M uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and has portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Production and release: Both cards are end-of-life. The M40 was released on November 9, 2015, with the predecessor Tesla Kepler and successor Tesla Pascal. The RX 5300M was released on November 12, 2019, with the predecessor Polaris Mobile and no listed successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 scores 39192, while the AMD Radeon RX 5300M scores 36529. The M40 wins this test with a delta of 7.3%. This is the sole recorded comparison, with the M40 taking 1 win and the RX 5300M taking 0.

The 7.3% gap in OpenCL performance is modest but consistent with the broader percentile standings. The M40's 83rd percentile rank versus the RX 5300M's 80th percentile rank places them in adjacent performance tiers. However, the M40's average benchmark score of 41897 is substantially higher than its single OpenCL result, driven by its Geekbench Vulkan score of 44602. The RX 5300M has no recorded Vulkan score, so its average of 36529 matches its only benchmark.

Looking at the rival comparisons, the M40's performance profile is competitive with much more recent cards. Its average score of 41897 is within 1.7% of the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41187), a card from a much later generation. It also trails the Radeon RX 7650 GRE (42723) by only 1.9%. This suggests the M40's raw compute throughput remains relevant despite its age and end-of-life status.

The RX 5300M's performance, by contrast, clusters tightly with older and workstation-oriented cards. Its average of 36529 is identical to the GeForce GTX TITAN X (36530), within 0.7% of the T1000 (36289), and within 1.9% of the Radeon Pro Duo (35860). The only rival it trails by more than 1.9% is the Radeon PRO W6400 (37157), which leads by 1.7%.

The practical interpretation is that the M40's advantage in OpenCL comes from its larger compute footprint: 3072 shading units versus 1408, 192 TMUs versus 88, and 96 ROPs versus 32. The RX 5300M compensates with higher clocks (1445 MHz boost versus 1112 MHz) and a more modern architecture, but the M40's sheer resource count wins out in this synthetic workload. The memory bandwidth difference, 288.4 GB/s versus 168.0 GB/s, also favors the M40 in memory-intensive compute tasks.

For users considering these cards, the benchmark data suggests the M40 is the stronger compute performer, but the RX 5300M offers a far more power-efficient package. The M40 requires a 600 W PSU and dual-slot cooling, while the RX 5300M draws 85 W and needs no external power connectors. These are not competing in the same physical or thermal envelope, which is the most important takeaway from the data.