AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two directly comparable benchmark results for these cards, and both tell the same story: the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT dominates the NVIDIA Tesla M40 in compute-oriented workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6950 XT scores 205,998 against the Tesla M40's 39,192, a lead of 425.6%. That is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm. The OpenCL result reflects raw compute throughput across a wide range of workloads, and the margin here is so large that it suggests the two cards are not competing in the same performance tier at all.

The Vulkan result narrows the gap slightly but still leaves no doubt about the winner. The RX 6950 XT posts 165,212 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Tesla M40 manages 44,602. That works out to a 270.4% advantage for the AMD card. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can expose hardware efficiency differences more directly than OpenCL, and even there the older NVIDIA architecture cannot keep pace. Interestingly, the Tesla M40's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, 44,602 versus 39,192, which is a modest reversal of the usual pattern and suggests the Maxwell architecture responds better to Vulkan's explicit control model. But that relative improvement does nothing to close the absolute gap.

Looking at the average benchmark scores in the database paints a similar picture. The RX 6950 XT carries an average benchmark score of 58,392, while the Tesla M40 sits at 41,897. The AMD card's nearest rivals list shows average scores ranging from 58,085 for the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM at one end to 58,657 for the AMD Radeon PRO V710 at the other, with the RX 6950 XT landing between them at 58,392. The Tesla M40's own nearest rivals cluster much lower, with the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 at 40,870 on the low side and the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE at 42,279 on the high side. The Tesla M40's 41,897 average slots between the RTX 3080 Ti at 41,187 and the RX 7650 GRE at 42,723, a tight grouping that shows the M40 is competitive with those cards in aggregate, but none of them approach the RX 6950 XT's average.

The percentile rankings reinforce the separation. The RX 6950 XT sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Tesla M40 rests at the 83rd. That five-point gap in percentile may sound modest, but given how many GPUs are in the database, it represents a substantial difference in standing. The head-to-head benchmark count is decisive: the RX 6950 XT wins 2 tests, the Tesla M40 wins 0.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows no benchmark category where the Tesla M40 outperforms the RX 6950 XT. Both available head-to-head tests, OpenCL and Vulkan, go to the AMD card by enormous margins. That said, the use-case split is not simply about speed; it is about what each card was designed to do and what the benchmark results imply for different workloads.

The RX 6950 XT's wins are comprehensive. Its OpenCL score of 205,998 versus 39,192 indicates overwhelming strength in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, which includes many rendering, simulation, and data-processing workloads. Its Vulkan score of 165,212 versus 44,602 shows that it also excels in modern graphics APIs, which matters for gaming and for games that use Vulkan as their primary rendering path. The card's 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 47.31 TFLOPS FP16 throughput (2:1 ratio) in the specification data support these results, as does its 739.2 GTexel/s texture rate and 295.7 GPixel/s pixel rate. The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth provides the data throughput needed to feed those compute units.

The Tesla M40, by contrast, is a compute-oriented accelerator from the Maxwell generation with no display outputs. Its 6.832 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is roughly a third of the RX 6950 XT's, and its 288.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is exactly half the AMD card's 576.0 GB/s. In the database, the M40 does have a Vulkan score that exceeds its OpenCL score, which hints that its architecture handles Vulkan relatively better, but the absolute numbers are still far below the AMD card. For workloads that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan, the data clearly favors the RX 6950 XT. The Tesla M40's strengths, if any exist in this comparison, would have to lie in areas not captured by these two benchmarks, but the database contains no such results for this card.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras and philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT is built on RDNA 2.0, the architecture behind the Radeon RX 6000 series, and uses the Navi 21 chip. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 uses Maxwell 2.0, the second iteration of NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture, built around the GM200 chip. The process node difference is stark: the RX 6950 XT is fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the Tesla M40 uses TSMC's 28 nm process. That is a two-generation jump in manufacturing technology, and it shows in transistor density. The RX 6950 XT packs 26,800 million transistors into a 520 mm² die, yielding a density of 51.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The Tesla M40 contains 8,000 million transistors on a larger 601 mm² die, giving it a density of just 13.3 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip fits more than three times as many transistors per area, which explains how it can deliver such higher performance despite a smaller die.

The transistor budget allocation differs as well. The RX 6950 XT allocates 5,120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 128 ROPs, along with 80 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Tesla M40 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores at all. The presence of ray tracing hardware in the AMD card is a defining feature difference, as ray tracing workloads are a key part of modern graphics pipelines and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The RX 6950 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes the 12_2 feature level, while the Tesla M40 only supports DirectX 12 at the older 12_1 feature level. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so API support is one of the few areas where the two match.

Memory architecture diverges significantly. The RX 6950 XT uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla M40 uses 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 384 GB/s bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s. The AMD card has more memory capacity and nearly double the bandwidth, which is critical for high-resolution textures and large datasets. The Tesla M40's memory clock runs at 1502 MHz, while the AMD card's memory clock is 2250 MHz, and the effective data rates are 18 Gbps for the AMD versus 6 Gbps for the Tesla. The RX 6950 XT also supports PCI Express 4.0, while the Tesla M40 uses PCI Express 3.0, which affects data transfer speeds between the GPU and the rest of the system.

Specification Differences

The RX 6950 XT's specifications place it firmly in the modern consumer flagship tier: a 7 nm process, a 520 mm² die, 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, a 256-bit bus, 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, 5,120 shading units, 80 ray tracing cores, 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 compute, 47.31 TFLOPS FP16 compute at a 2:1 ratio, a 335 W TDP, Triple-slot design, 2x 8-pin power connectors, PCIe 4.0 support, 1x HDMI 2.1 and 2x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, and 12 Ultimate DirectX support with Vulkan 1.4. Its dimensions are 267 mm in length, 120 mm in height, 50 mm in width. The card carries a launch MSRP of 1,099 USD, which appears once here and nowhere else.

The Tesla M40, on the other hand, has a 28 nm process, 601 mm² die, 12 GB of GDDR5 memory, 384-bit bus, 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, 3,072 shading units, 6.832 TFLOPS, no FP16 specified, 250 W TDP, Dual-slot design, 8-pin EPS power connector, PCIe 3.0, no display outputs, DirectX 12 at the 12_1 level, and no ray tracing cores. Its length matches the AMD card at 267 mm, but it has no listed height or width in the database. The M40 has no launch MSRP recorded. The RX 6950 XT has a base clock of 1860 MHz, a boost clock of 2310 MHz, and a game clock of 2100 MHz, while the Tesla M40 has a base clock of 948 MHz and a boost clock of 1112 MHz. The AMD card's pixel rate of 295.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 739.2 GTexel/s dwarf the Tesla's 106.8 GPixel/s and 213.5 GTexel/s. The RX 6950 XT also has 128 ROPs versus the Tesla's 96, and 320 TMUs versus the Tesla's 192.

The production status for both is end-of-life. The RX 6950 XT was released on 2022-05-09, while the Tesla M40 came out on 2015-11-09. The AMD card's predecessor is Navi and its successor is Navi III, while the Tesla's predecessor is Tesla Kepler and its successor is Tesla Pascal.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT has an average benchmark score of 58,392, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 has an average score of 41,897.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6950 XT in OpenCL?

A: The RX 6950 XT scores 205,998 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 39,192 for the Tesla M40, a 425.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 have any ray tracing cores?

A: No, the Tesla M40 has no ray tracing cores, while the RX 6950 XT has 80.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 6950 XT is built on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the Tesla M40 uses TSMC's 28 nm process.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6950 XT has 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Tesla M40 has 288.4 GB/s with 12 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Q: What API levels does the Tesla M40 support?

A: The Tesla M40 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but it does not support DirectX 12 Ultimate like the RX 6950 XT does.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT is the superior card in every measured category. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average score, a higher percentile ranking, and a more modern architecture across every specification that matters. The 425.6% lead in OpenCL and 270.4% lead in Vulkan are not close calls, they are decisive outcomes. For anyone choosing between these two based on the database, the RX 6950 XT is the clear pick for OpenCL and Vulkan workloads.

The Tesla M40 does have its place in the database, but it is not as a competitor to the RX 6950 XT. Its percentile ranking of 83 is respectable, and its average score of 41,897 puts it in the same neighborhood as the RTX 3080 Ti and RX 7650 GRE, but that neighborhood is far below the RX 6950 XT's 88th percentile standing. The M40 has no recorded wins in this comparison. If the workload requires OpenCL compute throughput, the RX 6950 XT provides 23.65 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 47.31 TFLOPS of FP16 compute, versus the Tesla's 6.832 TFLOPS, and that performance gap is what the benchmarks reflect.

For users who need OpenCL or Vulkan performance, the RX 6950 XT is the only rational choice from this data. The Tesla M40 might suit workloads that require its specific Maxwell architecture characteristics, but the database contains no benchmarks showing any advantage for it. The RX 6950 XT also has display outputs, while the Tesla M40 has none, making the AMD card usable in a wider range of systems. The verdict comes down to the numbers: the RX 6950 XT wins everywhere the data measures, and the Tesla M40 has no recorded strengths in this comparison.