AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

The data presents a fascinating clash of architectures from different eras: NVIDIA’s Tesla M40, a Maxwell-based compute accelerator from late 2015, against AMD’s Radeon RX Vega 56, a GCN 5.0 consumer card from mid-2017. The benchmark results reveal a complex picture where raw compute potential and memory bandwidth tell different stories than the average scores suggest. The Tesla M40 holds a higher overall percentile ranking (83rd vs. 81st) and a significantly higher average benchmark score (41,897 vs. 37,507), yet the Vega 56 counters with superior throughput metrics in several key areas. This analysis digs into the numbers to determine what each card does best and for whom.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence appears in the compute-oriented workloads. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 delivers a massive FP32 throughput of 10.54 TFLOPS, which is 54% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla M40’s 6.832 TFLOPS. This advantage is further amplified in FP16 operations, where the Vega 56 achieves 21.09 TFLOPS (2:1) — a capability the Tesla M40 lacks entirely, as its FP16 field is null. The texture rate tells a similar story: the Vega 56’s 329.5 GTexel/s outpaces the M40’s 213.5 GTexel/s by 54.3%. These are not marginal gains; they represent a fundamental architectural lead in raw shader and texture processing.

However, the NVIDIA card fights back in memory-centric metrics. The Tesla M40 features a 384-bit memory bus paired with 12 GB of GDDR5, yielding a pixel rate of 106.8 GPixel/s. This edges out the Vega 56’s 94.14 GPixel/s, a 13.4% advantage despite the AMD card’s superior 2048-bit HBM2 interface. The M40 also holds a slight lead in shading unit efficiency per clock: its 3072 shading units at a 1112 MHz boost clock produce a higher pixel throughput per ROP (96 ROPs vs. 64) than the Vega 56’s 3584 units at 1471 MHz. The average benchmark scores reinforce this split — the M40’s 41,897 average is 11.7% higher than the Vega 56’s 37,507, placing it 11.7% ahead in the aggregate.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context. The Tesla M40’s average score sits between the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE (42,723, which is 1.9% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41,187, which is 1.7% lower). The Vega 56, meanwhile, trades blows with the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37,628, just 0.3% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (37,648, 0.4% higher). This suggests the M40 competes in a higher performance tier overall, while the Vega 56 sits in a mid-range bracket despite its compute prowess.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two cards by workload type. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 is the aggregate winner, with an 11.7% higher average benchmark score and a 2-percentile advantage (83rd vs. 81st). Its 12 GB VRAM capacity doubles the Vega 56’s 8 GB, and its pixel rate is superior. Anyone prioritizing raw rasterization throughput, larger memory pools, or compatibility with NVIDIA’s compute ecosystem — evidenced by its Vulkan 1.4 support versus the Vega 56’s Vulkan 1.3 — should lean toward the M40. The M40’s 6.832 TFLOPS FP32, while lower than the Vega 56’s, is still substantial, and its 288.4 GB/s bandwidth is respectable for a 384-bit GDDR5 setup.

Conversely, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 wins decisively on compute density and efficiency. Its 54% higher FP32 throughput and exclusive FP16 support make it the obvious choice for workloads that leverage half-precision math — a common feature in modern machine learning inference and certain scientific simulations. The Vega 56 also offers a lower TDP of 210 W versus the M40’s 250 W, and its 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is 42% higher, which benefits memory-bound compute tasks. The data shows the Vega 56 is not a slouch in rasterization either, but its 94.14 GPixel/s trails the M40. For users constrained by power draw or requiring FP16 acceleration, the Vega 56 is the data-backed pick. For everyone else, the M40’s higher average score and larger memory make it the safer default.

Architecture Differences

The process node and foundry choices set the stage. The Tesla M40 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the Vega 56 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This 14 nm node allows AMD to pack 12,500 million transistors into a 495 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 25.3M / mm². The M40, by contrast, houses 8,000 million transistors on a larger 601 mm² die, yielding a density of just 13.3M / mm². The Vega 56’s density advantage is 90.2% higher, a direct consequence of the more advanced process.

The memory subsystems are radically different. The M40 uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, while the Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The HBM2’s wider bus gives the Vega 56 a 42% bandwidth advantage (409.6 GB/s vs. 288.4 GB/s) despite having less capacity. Clock speeds also differ: the M40’s base clock is 948 MHz with a boost of 1112 MHz, whereas the Vega 56 runs at 1156 MHz base and 1471 MHz boost. The M40’s memory runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the Vega 56’s memory operates at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) — slower per pin, but multiplied across far more pins.

Feature sets diverge on output capabilities. The Tesla M40 has no display outputs, confirming its compute-only design, while the Vega 56 provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The M40 also uses an 8-pin EPS power connector, whereas the Vega 56 uses 2x 8-pin connectors, reflecting different power delivery expectations. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but the M40’s Vulkan 1.4 support is newer than the Vega 56’s Vulkan 1.3.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M40 has an average benchmark score of 41,897, which is 11.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56’s 37,507.

Q: Does the AMD card offer any compute advantage?

A: Yes, the Vega 56 delivers 10.54 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.09 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the M40 offers 6.832 TFLOPS FP32 and no FP16 support.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth difference?

A: The M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5 with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth — a 42% bandwidth advantage for AMD.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Tesla M40 achieves 106.8 GPixel/s, which is 13.4% higher than the Vega 56’s 94.14 GPixel/s.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The M40 has a TDP of 250 W and suggests a 600 W PSU, while the Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W and suggests a 550 W PSU.

Q: Are there display output differences?

A: The M40 has no display outputs, whereas the Vega 56 provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 is the clear winner in scenarios demanding high pixel throughput and large memory capacity. Its 106.8 GPixel/s pixel rate and 12 GB VRAM make it suitable for rendering tasks that require high-resolution framebuffers or large texture datasets. The M40’s higher average benchmark score (41,897 vs. 37,507) and 83rd percentile ranking indicate stronger overall performance in mixed workloads. Its Vulkan 1.4 support also suggests better forward compatibility with modern graphics APIs. For compute tasks that do not require FP16, the M40’s 6.832 TFLOPS is sufficient, and its 601 mm² die with 8,000 million transistors provides a robust foundation for sustained workloads.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 wins in compute-heavy applications that leverage its FP16 capability and higher FP32 throughput. The 21.09 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) figure is a decisive advantage for machine learning inference, certain scientific simulations, and media processing that uses half-precision arithmetic. The Vega 56’s 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is also a boon for memory-bound algorithms, and its 329.5 GTexel/s texture rate outperforms the M40 by 54%. The lower TDP (210 W vs. 250 W) makes it a more power-efficient choice for dense compute clusters. Additionally, the Vega 56’s display outputs mean it can serve as a hybrid compute and display card, a flexibility the M40 lacks entirely.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measured specification. The M40 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC with 8,000 million transistors on a 601 mm² die, while the Vega 56 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. The M40’s clocks are 948 MHz base and 1112 MHz boost, versus the Vega 56’s 1156 MHz base and 1471 MHz boost. Memory configurations are distinct: the M40 has 12 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus at 288.4 GB/s, while the Vega 56 has 8 GB HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus at 409.6 GB/s.

Compute resources differ: the M40 packs 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, while the Vega 56 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The M40’s pixel rate is 106.8 GPixel/s versus 94.14 GPixel/s, but the Vega 56’s texture rate is 329.5 GTexel/s versus 213.5 GTexel/s. FP32 output is 6.832 TFLOPS for the M40 and 10.54 TFLOPS for the Vega 56, with the latter also offering 21.09 TFLOPS FP16. TDP is 250 W for the M40 and 210 W for the Vega 56. Power connectors are 8-pin EPS for the M40 and 2x 8-pin for the Vega 56. The M40 has no display outputs, while the Vega 56 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The M40 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 56 supports Vulkan 1.3; both share DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The M40 is 267 mm long (10.5 inches), while the Vega 56 is 280 mm long (11 inches) with dimensions of 111 mm height and 40 mm width.