AMD Radeon RX 560X vs NVIDIA Tesla K40m Comparison

The benchmark data shows a clear split between two very different GPU generations. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m, a 2013-era compute card, edges out the newer AMD Radeon RX 560X in raw OpenCL performance, but the RX 560X counters with modern API support and far greater efficiency. The verdict is not about a single winner, but about matching the right tool to the right workload.

The Verdict

For pure compute throughput in legacy OpenCL workloads, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m is the stronger choice. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 19,885 surpasses the RX 560X’s 17,020 by a decisive 16.8%. The data also places the K40m in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, three points higher than the RX 560X’s 62nd percentile. If your application relies on OpenCL and cannot leverage newer APIs, the K40m’s additional shading units (2,880 vs. 1,024) and wider memory bus (384-bit vs. 128-bit) deliver measurable compute advantages that the RX 560X cannot overcome.

However, the AMD Radeon RX 560X is the more versatile and forward-looking option. While it loses the OpenCL head-to-head, it is the only card in this comparison with a Geekbench Vulkan score (20,231), which is actually higher than the K40m’s OpenCL result. This indicates that in Vulkan-based workloads, the RX 560X would likely outperform the K40m, which lacks any Vulkan benchmark data. The RX 560X also supports DirectX 12 (12_0) fully, whereas the K40m is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). For any modern gaming, rendering, or compute task that uses Vulkan or DirectX 12, the RX 560X is the only viable option.

The efficiency gap is stark. The RX 560X consumes 75 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the K40m draws 245 W and needs a 550 W power supply. The RX 560X also has a much higher transistor density (24.4M / mm² vs. 12.6M / mm²) on a smaller 14 nm process, making it the clear choice for systems with power or thermal constraints. The K40m also has no display outputs, making it strictly a compute card; the RX 560X includes 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, allowing it to function as a standard graphics card.

Final call: Choose the Tesla K40m for legacy OpenCL compute density and maximum raw floating-point throughput. Choose the Radeon RX 560X for modern API compatibility, display output, and dramatically lower power requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40m has an average benchmark score of 19,885, while the AMD Radeon RX 560X has an average of 18,626. The K40m’s score is derived from a single Geekbench OpenCL test, whereas the RX 560X’s average includes both OpenCL (17,020) and Vulkan (20,231) results.

Q: Does the RX 560X support any APIs that the K40m does not?

A: Yes. The RX 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the K40m is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RX 560X also has a Vulkan benchmark score (20,231), while the K40m has no Vulkan benchmark data.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The K40m has a TDP of 245 W with a suggested power supply of 550 W, while the RX 560X has a TDP of just 75 W with a suggested 250 W PSU. The RX 560X draws no power connectors, whereas the K40m’s power connector configuration is unspecified.

Q: Can either card be used for display output?

A: Only the RX 560X. It features 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Tesla K40m has no display outputs and is strictly a compute accelerator.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Tesla K40m, with 288.4 GB/s across a 384-bit bus, versus the RX 560X’s 112.0 GB/s across a 128-bit bus. The K40m also has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory compared to 4 GB on the RX 560X.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The K40m’s closest rival is the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905, -0.1% delta), showing near-parity. The RX 560X’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18,685, -0.3% delta), also near-parity. Notably, the RX 560X sits between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (18,789, -0.9%) and AMD FirePro D500 (18,533, +0.5%).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m is built on the Kepler architecture (chip GK110B), while the AMD Radeon RX 560X uses GCN 4.0 (chip Polaris 21). This fundamental split explains most of their behavioral differences.

Kepler, as implemented in the K40m, is a compute-first design from 2013. It packs 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs into a massive 561 mm² die. The chip contains 7,080 million transistors on a 28 nm process from TSMC. This yields a transistor density of 12.6M / mm², which is low by modern standards but reflects the larger, power-hungry design philosophy of early-2010s compute cards. The K40m’s FP32 throughput is 5.046 TFLOPS, and it has no dedicated FP16 support listed.

GCN 4.0, found in the RX 560X, is a more modern and efficient design. It uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, packing just 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die. This results in a much higher transistor density of 24.4M / mm², nearly double the K40m. The RX 560X has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with an FP32 rating of 2.611 TFLOPS. Notably, it also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (2.611 TFLOPS), which the K40m does not list. This makes the RX 560X potentially faster in mixed-precision workloads that leverage FP16.

The memory architectures also differ significantly. The K40m uses a 384-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR5, achieving 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 560X uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5, achieving 112.0 GB/s. The K40m’s wider bus is a clear advantage for memory-bound compute tasks, but the RX 560X’s smaller footprint and lower power draw reflect its consumer-oriented design.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla K40m | AMD Radeon RX 560X |

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

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 3,000 million |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 745 MHz | 1175 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 876 MHz | 1275 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps) | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2880 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 240 | 64 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.56 GPixel/s | 20.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 210.2 GTexel/s | 81.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.046 TFLOPS | 2.611 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | N/A | 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 245 W | 75 W |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 250 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DP 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.3 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm | 170 mm |

| Release Date | 2013-11-21 | 2018-04-10 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA Tesla K40m wins decisively. The K40m scores 19,885 against the RX 560X’s 17,020, a margin of 16.8%. This is a substantial gap that reflects the K40m’s superior raw compute resources: 2.9x more shading units, 3.75x more TMUs, and 3x more ROPs. The K40m also has 2.57x more memory bandwidth (288.4 GB/s vs. 112.0 GB/s), which is critical for OpenCL workloads that frequently access large datasets.

However, the benchmark picture is incomplete without considering the RX 560X’s Vulkan result. The RX 560X scores 20,231 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is higher than the K40m’s OpenCL score of 19,885. While these are different APIs and not directly comparable, the data suggests that the RX 560X is capable of outperforming the K40m in Vulkan-based applications. The K40m has no Vulkan benchmark score, and its older architecture lacks the modern asynchronous compute and scheduling features that GCN 4.0 brings to Vulkan.

The percentile rankings further contextualize these results. The K40m sits in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 560X is in the 62nd. This means the K40m is slightly better positioned relative to the entire GPU population, largely due to its dominant OpenCL performance. The RX 560X’s lower percentile is dragged down by its weaker OpenCL result, despite its Vulkan strength.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Tesla K40m wins in: Legacy OpenCL compute workloads, raw FP32 throughput (5.046 TFLOPS vs. 2.611 TFLOPS), memory bandwidth (288.4 GB/s vs. 112.0 GB/s), and memory capacity (12 GB vs. 4 GB). It is the clear choice for scientific computing, data processing, or any headless server environment where OpenCL is the standard API. Its 267 mm length and dual-slot design suggest it is built for workstation chassis, not compact systems. The K40m’s 65th percentile ranking also indicates stronger overall standing among all GPUs.

AMD Radeon RX 560X wins in: Modern API support (Vulkan 1.3, DirectX 12_0), display output capability, and power efficiency (75 W TDP vs. 245 W). Its Vulkan score of 20,231 exceeds the K40m’s best benchmark, showing that in Vulkan workloads it can outperform the older card. The RX 560X’s 14 nm process and higher transistor density (24.4M / mm²) make it far more efficient per watt. It also supports FP16 at full rate, which the K40m lacks. For gaming, desktop rendering, or any workload using Vulkan or DirectX 12, the RX 560X is the only functional option due to the K40m’s lack of display outputs. Its 170 mm length and lack of power connectors make it suitable for small form-factor builds.

The data-driven split is clear: use the K40m for dense, OpenCL-heavy compute in a server or workstation; use the RX 560X for interactive graphics, modern APIs, and power-sensitive environments.