AMD Radeon RX 9070 vs NVIDIA Tesla K40m Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single shared benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 scores 131,539 points, while the NVIDIA Tesla K40m scores 19,885 points. The RX 9070 wins by a delta of 561.5%, a massive margin that reflects the generational gulf between these products. To put that in context, the RX 9070's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 23,877, while the Tesla K40m's average is 19,885. The RX 9070's OpenCL result alone is roughly 5.5 times higher than the Tesla K40m's entire average.

Looking at the RX 9070's broader benchmark suite, its performance profile varies significantly by workload. In Passmark G3D, it scores 25,381, which places it in the 69th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its Passmark GPU Compute score is 14,737, while DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores are 343, 141, 281, and 74 respectively. The Geekbench Vulkan result is 58,705, and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 6,290. These numbers show a card that excels in modern APIs and compute tasks, but its older DirectX scores are comparatively modest, likely reflecting driver optimizations or benchmark-specific quirks rather than raw hardware limits.

The Tesla K40m, by contrast, has only one recorded benchmark in the database: the Geekbench OpenCL score of 19,885. Its 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs is surprisingly close to the RX 9070's 69th percentile, but this is misleading. The percentile is based on average scores across all tests, and the Tesla K40m's single data point drags its average down. The RX 9070's average of 23,877 is 20.1% higher than the Tesla K40m's average of 19,885, despite the RX 9070 having multiple lower-scoring DirectX tests that depress its overall average.

The nearest rivals for the RX 9070 include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z with an average score of 23,736 (0.6% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6800S at 24,063 (0.8% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile at 23,628 (1.1% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER at 24,170 (1.2% higher). This cluster of scores, all within roughly 1.2% of each other, indicates the RX 9070 sits in a competitive performance band where minor driver or workload variations can tip the ranking. For the Tesla K40m, its nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W7000 at 19,905 (0.1% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT at 19,765 (0.6% higher), the AMD FirePro D300 at 19,637 (1.3% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 at 19,602 (1.4% higher). These deltas are small, suggesting the Tesla K40m's performance level is tightly grouped with those older workstation cards.

The head-to-head delta of 561.5% is the largest single-test margin in this comparison, and it is not close. The RX 9070's OpenCL score is over six times higher than the Tesla K40m's, which is consistent with the architectural and process differences detailed below. No other benchmark in the database pits these two directly, so the OpenCL result stands as the definitive quantitative comparison available.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 9070 compare to the NVIDIA Tesla K40m in OpenCL performance?

A: The RX 9070 scores 131,539 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Tesla K40m scores 19,885. The RX 9070 leads by 561.5%, a dominant margin in the only shared benchmark.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score across all recorded tests?

A: The RX 9070 has an average benchmark score of 23,877 across its ten recorded tests, while the Tesla K40m has an average of 19,885 from a single test. The RX 9070's average is 20.1% higher.

Q: How do these cards rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RX 9070 sits in the 69th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla K40m sits in the 65th percentile. Despite the RX 9070's higher percentile, both cards occupy relatively mid-tier positions in the overall distribution.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for the RX 9070 by average score?

A: The closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z (23,736, 0.6% lower), AMD Radeon RX 6800S (24,063, 0.8% higher), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile (23,628, 1.1% lower), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (24,170, 1.2% higher).

Q: What are the nearest rivals for the Tesla K40m by average score?

A: The closest competitors are the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905, 0.1% lower), AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765, 0.6% higher), AMD FirePro D300 (19,637, 1.3% higher), and NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602, 1.4% higher).

Q: Which card has better DirectX 12 API support?

A: The RX 9070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Tesla K40m supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The RX 9070's newer API level enables features the Tesla K40m cannot access.

Architecture Differences

The RX 9070 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 48 chip, while the Tesla K40m uses the Kepler architecture with the GK110B chip. This is a fundamental generational split: RDNA 4.0 is a modern gaming-first design, while Kepler is a compute-oriented architecture from an earlier era. The manufacturing process tells the story clearly. The RX 9070 uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Tesla K40m uses a 28 nm process at the same foundry. The transistor counts reflect this: the RX 9070 packs 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 151.0 million per mm². The Tesla K40m has 7,080 million transistors on a larger 561 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 12.6 million per mm². That is a 12-fold difference in density, which directly enables the RX 9070's higher clock speeds and feature set.

The RX 9070 includes 56 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Tesla K40m, which has no RT cores listed. The RX 9070 also has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. The Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and only 48 render output units. The RX 9070's render output unit count is nearly three times higher, which explains its much higher pixel rate. The RX 9070 also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Tesla K40m has no listed FP16 capability, indicating its compute focus was on FP32 only.

Memory architectures diverge as well. The RX 9070 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla K40m uses 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, but its bandwidth is only 288.4 GB/s. The RX 9070's wider effective bandwidth comes from both faster memory (20.1 Gbps effective versus 6 Gbps effective) and a more efficient memory controller. The bus interface also differs: the RX 9070 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Tesla K40m uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Display outputs are another major split. The RX 9070 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a outputs, making it a fully functional graphics card. The Tesla K40m has no display outputs, as it is a compute-only accelerator designed for server or workstation use. API support also differs: the RX 9070 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla K40m supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RX 9070's Vulkan version is newer, and its DirectX 12 Ultimate tier enables features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the Tesla K40m cannot execute.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The RX 9070 has a base clock of 1330 MHz and a boost clock of 2520 MHz, with a game clock of 2070 MHz. The Tesla K40m has a base clock of 745 MHz and a boost clock of 876 MHz. The RX 9070's boost clock is nearly three times higher, a direct consequence of the 4 nm process. Memory clocks differ as well: the RX 9070 runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), while the Tesla K40m runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity differs by 4 GB: the RX 9070 has 16 GB, the Tesla K40m has 12 GB. Bus width is 256 bits versus 384 bits, but the RX 9070's higher memory clock more than compensates, yielding 644.6 GB/s versus 288.4 GB/s. The RX 9070 has 3,584 shading units versus 2,880, and 128 ROPs versus 48. The Tesla K40m has slightly more TMUs at 240 versus 224, but the RX 9070's higher clocks give it a texture rate of 564.5 GTexel/s against the Tesla K40m's 210.2 GTexel/s. Pixel rates are 322.6 GPixel/s versus 52.56 GPixel/s.

FP32 compute is 36.13 TFLOPS for the RX 9070 versus 5.046 TFLOPS for the Tesla K40m. The RX 9070 also lists FP16 at 36.13 TFLOPS (1:1), which the Tesla K40m does not provide. Power consumption is 220 W for the RX 9070 versus 245 W for the Tesla K40m, a notable result given the RX 9070's far higher performance. The RX 9070 requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, while the Tesla K40m has no listed power connectors, likely using a server-style power input. Both suggest a 550 W PSU.

The RX 9070 has a launch MSRP of 549 USD, while the Tesla K40m had a launch MSRP of 7,699 USD. The RX 9070 was released on 2025-03-05, while the Tesla K40m was released on 2013-11-21. The RX 9070 is listed as Active in production, while the Tesla K40m is End-of-life. The RX 9070's predecessor is Navi III, while the Tesla K40m's predecessor is Tesla Fermi and its successor is Tesla Maxwell. The Tesla K40m has a physical length of 267 mm (10.5 inches), while the RX 9070 has no recorded dimensions.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 9070 is the dominant performer in every measurable way. Its OpenCL score is 561.5% higher than the Tesla K40m's, its average benchmark score is 20.1% higher, and it achieves this while consuming 220 W versus 245 W. The RX 9070 also carries 16 GB of memory versus 12 GB, delivers more than double the memory bandwidth, and supports modern APIs and display outputs. The Tesla K40m is a compute-only accelerator with no display outputs, a 28 nm process, and a 2013 release date. Its only advantage is a higher transistor count per die area, which is irrelevant to performance outcomes.

For a user choosing between these two, the RX 9070 is the obvious pick for any workload that appears in the database. It wins the only shared benchmark by a massive margin, and its percentile ranking (69th versus 65th) reflects a higher overall position despite the Tesla K40m's narrower benchmark set. The Tesla K40m's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT, are all within 1.4% of its average score, indicating it sits in a performance tier that the RX 9070 completely overshadows. The RX 9070's nearest rivals, by contrast, are modern cards like the RTX 3080 Mobile and RTX 2080 SUPER, all within 1.2% of its average.

The verdict is straightforward: the RX 9070 is the superior card for compute and graphics performance, power efficiency, and feature support. The Tesla K40m is an end-of-life product that only makes sense in legacy compute environments where its Kepler architecture is a requirement. Anyone with a choice should select the RX 9070, as the recorded data shows no scenario where the Tesla K40m offers a competitive advantage. The 561.5% delta in OpenCL is not a marginal edge; it is a generational leap that renders the comparison moot for practical purposes.