AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes two shared benchmark tests between the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both cases, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is the decisive winner, and the deltas are substantial.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT scores 187,673, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB scores 37,439. This translates to a 401.3% advantage for the AMD part. The margin is so large that the Tesla M40’s score is roughly one-fifth of the AMD card’s output. Such a gap reflects not only generational differences but also fundamental architectural improvements, which are explored in the next section.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT scores 148,525, against 45,975 for the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB. The delta here is 223.1%, meaning the AMD card more than triples the Tesla’s result. Vulkan is a modern, low-overhead API, and the AMD architecture is designed to exploit it fully. The Tesla M40, built for compute workloads in data centers, does not have the same level of graphics-oriented optimization.

The head-to-head tally is 2 wins for the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT and 0 wins for the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB. There is no benchmark in the database where the Tesla M40 outperforms the RX 6900 XT. This is a clean sweep, but it is notably the Tesla M40 has a much narrower benchmark presence: it only has two recorded scores in the database, both of which are the Geekbench tests listed here. The AMD card, by contrast, has a broader benchmark portfolio, including 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, PassMark suites, and Geekbench Metal.

The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT also holds a higher average benchmark score across all its tests: 50,951, compared to 41,707 for the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB. The percentile ranking reinforces this: the AMD card sits at the 86th percentile among all GPUs, while the Tesla M40 sits at the 83rd percentile. Despite the Tesla’s lower absolute scores, its percentile is relatively high, which suggests that the benchmark pool it appears in skews toward lower-performing cards.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and significant. The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is built on RDNA 2.0, using the Navi 21 chip, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB uses Maxwell 2.0, with the GM200 chip, on a 28 nm process, also from TSMC. The node difference alone, 7 nm versus 28 nm, explains much of the efficiency and performance disparity.

Transistor counts differ accordingly. The AMD chip packs 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.5 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip has 8,000 million transistors on a larger 601 mm² die, giving a density of just 13.3 million per mm². The AMD chip is both denser and, in absolute terms, has over three times as many transistors. This allows for far more compute resources in a similar physical footprint.

Clock speeds also favor the AMD card significantly. The RX 6900 XT has a base clock of 1825 MHz, a game clock of 2015 MHz, and a boost clock of 2250 MHz. The Tesla M40 has a base clock of 948 MHz and a boost clock of 1112 MHz. The AMD card’s boost clock is more than double the Tesla’s base clock. Higher clocks, combined with a newer architecture, drive the large benchmark deltas.

Memory configurations are a notable point of differentiation. The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The Tesla M40 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s. The Tesla has more capacity, but the AMD card has nearly 80% more bandwidth. The AMD memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the Tesla’s is 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The wider bus on the Tesla cannot compensate for the slower memory technology.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the AMD part. The RX 6900 XT has 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. It also has 80 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Tesla M40 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. Pixel rate is 288.0 GPixel/s for the AMD card versus 106.8 GPixel/s for the Tesla. Texture rate is 720.0 GTexel/s versus 213.5 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 23.04 TFLOPS for the AMD card versus 6.832 TFLOPS for the Tesla. The AMD card also supports FP16 at 46.08 TFLOPS (2:1), while the Tesla has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power and physical specifications differ as well. The AMD card has a TDP of 300 W and uses two 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 700 W. The Tesla M40 has a TDP of 250 W, uses an 8-pin EPS connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU. The AMD card is triple-slot, while the Tesla is dual-slot. Both are 267 mm long. The AMD card has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C), while the Tesla M40 has no display outputs at all, which is typical of a compute-focused accelerator.

Bus interfaces also differ: the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Tesla M40 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Tesla supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card was released in 2020, while the Tesla M40 was released in 2015, a five-year gap that explains the architectural evolution.

Where Each One Wins

Given the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT wins in every recorded scenario. There are no tests where the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB comes out ahead. That said, the use cases for each card are distinct, and the data supports different conclusions depending on workload.

The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is clearly a graphics-first card. Its wins in Vulkan and OpenCL, combined with its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and display outputs, make it suitable for gaming, workstation graphics, and any application that requires rasterization or ray tracing. The presence of 80 ray tracing cores means it can handle hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature the Tesla M40 lacks entirely. Its high FP32 throughput of 23.04 TFLOPS also makes it capable in compute tasks that rely on single-precision floating point.

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB, despite losing the head-to-head benchmarks, has a specific role. Its 24 GB memory capacity is larger than the AMD card’s 16 GB, which is an advantage for workloads that need to hold large datasets on the GPU, such as certain inference tasks or large-batch processing. Its 384-bit memory bus, while slower in bandwidth, can be beneficial for memory-bound workloads that favor capacity over speed. The card’s lack of display outputs and its 250 W TDP suggest it was designed for server installations where graphics output is irrelevant.

In the database’s broader context, the Tesla M40’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla M40 (a sibling variant with an average score of 41,897, a delta of -0.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (average score 41,187, delta 1.3%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (average score 40,870, delta 2%). These deltas show the Tesla M40 is within 2% of several other GPUs, meaning its performance class is tightly clustered. It is not an outlier on the low end; it sits in the 83rd percentile.

For the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA CMP 50HX (average score 51,790, delta -1.6%), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (average score 50,001, delta 1.9%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (average score 49,957, delta 2%), and the Intel Arc A550M (average score 49,737, delta 2.4%). These are all modern or high-end parts, and the RX 6900 XT is within a few percentage points of each. This indicates the AMD card is competitive with much newer hardware, despite being from 2020.

The practical takeaway is that the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is a general-purpose high-performance GPU, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB is a specialized compute accelerator with a memory capacity advantage. For any graphics or gaming workload, the RX 6900 XT is the clear choice. For a narrow set of memory-capacity-driven compute tasks, the Tesla M40 might be considered, but its raw compute performance is far lower.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. In every shared benchmark, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT outperforms the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB by a massive margin. The OpenCL delta of 401.3% and the Vulkan delta of 223.1% are not incremental improvements; they are generational leaps. The AMD card is built on a 7 nm process with over three times the transistor count, more than double the boost clock, and nearly double the memory bandwidth. It also adds ray tracing cores, a feature absent from the Tesla M40.

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB has one clear specification advantage: memory capacity. Its 24 GB of GDDR5 exceeds the AMD card’s 16 GB of GDDR6. For workloads that require fitting large models or datasets into VRAM without regard to speed, the Tesla M40 could be relevant. However, the bandwidth difference, 288.4 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s, means that even memory-heavy tasks will likely run faster on the AMD card, provided they fit within 16 GB.

The production status of both cards is end-of-life, so neither is a current-generation purchase. But within the database context, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is the superior part for nearly all purposes. Its percentile ranking of 86 versus 83 for the Tesla M40, and its higher average score of 50,951 versus 41,707, confirm this.

Who should pick the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT? Anyone needing a graphics-capable GPU with strong compute performance, modern API support, and ray tracing. The card’s display outputs make it usable in a desktop environment, and its DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with current and near-future games.

Who should pick the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB? The list is short: someone who specifically needs 24 GB of VRAM on a 250 W power budget with a dual-slot form factor, and who does not require graphics output. Even then, the performance penalty is severe. The Tesla M40’s FP32 throughput of 6.832 TFLOPS is less than a third of the AMD card’s 23.04 TFLOPS. In a server context where the card is one of many, and where memory capacity is the sole criterion, it might have a niche. But for any general-purpose or graphics workload, the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is the definitive choice.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT has an average benchmark score of 50,951, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB has an average score of 41,707.

Q: What is the performance difference in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT scores 187,673 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 401.3% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB’s score of 37,439.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB have more memory than the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT?

A: Yes, the Tesla M40 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. However, the AMD card has higher memory bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s versus 288.4 GB/s.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT has 80 dedicated ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT is built on a 7 nm process, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB uses a 28 nm process. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT scores 148,525 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 223.1% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB’s score of 45,975.