Intel Arc A530M vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB Comparison

# Intel Arc A530M vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a split decision between these two GPUs, with each card taking one victory in the two available tests. The Intel Arc A530M delivers a decisive win in the Geekbench OpenCL workload, scoring 49,735 points against the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB’s 37,439 points. That represents a 32.8% advantage for the Intel part, a substantial margin that indicates a significant gap in general-purpose compute performance as measured by OpenCL. The Tesla M40, despite being an older architecture, counters with a more modest win in Geekbench Vulkan, posting 45,975 points compared to the Arc A530M’s 43,492 points — a 5.4% edge for NVIDIA.

The aggregate picture reinforces the Intel card’s overall lead. The Arc A530M holds an average benchmark score of 46,614, which places it in the 85th percentile of all GPUs. The Tesla M40 24 GB, by contrast, averages 41,707 points, sitting in the 83rd percentile. This means the Intel part is not just ahead in one test; its combined performance across both workloads keeps it above its rival in the broader ranking distribution. The difference in average scores is roughly 4,900 points, and when considering the nearest rivals for each card, the positioning becomes clearer. The Arc A530M’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 5600M at 46,601 points (0% delta), while the Tesla M40 24 GB’s nearest match is another Tesla M40 variant at 41,897 points (a -0.5% delta, meaning the 24 GB version is slightly behind that sibling).

Vulkan results tell a nuanced story. Although the Tesla M40 wins that specific test, its OpenCL deficit is so large that it cannot overcome the overall average gap. The Intel Arc A530M’s 32.8% OpenCL victory dwarfs the Tesla’s 5.4% Vulkan edge in terms of raw scoring impact. For applications that rely heavily on OpenCL compute — such as certain scientific workloads or rendering pipelines — this delta is decisive. Conversely, Vulkan-centric workloads, particularly modern game engines or Vulkan-based compute APIs, would see the Tesla M40 hold a measurable but smaller advantage.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark, reflecting nearly eight years of semiconductor progression. The Intel Arc A530M is built on the DG2-256 chip using the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist generation (Arc 5 Mobile). It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, packing 11,500 million transistors into a 269 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 42.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB, on the other hand, uses the GM200 chip with Maxwell 2.0 architecture from the Tesla Maxwell generation. It is built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, but contains fewer transistors overall — 8,000 million — spread across a much larger 601 mm² die. Its transistor density is just 13.3 million per square millimeter.

These process and density differences translate into divergent design philosophies. The Intel part achieves higher density through modern fabrication, enabling more features per unit area. The Tesla M40 compensates with a physically larger die and higher raw counts in some areas. The Arc A530M includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Tesla M40, which has no RT cores listed. Neither card includes tensor cores, so AI acceleration is not a distinguishing factor here.

The compute unit configurations also differ substantially. The Intel Arc A530M has 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The Tesla M40 24 GB doubles many of these counts: 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. This gives the NVIDIA card higher theoretical peak rates — its pixel rate is 106.8 GPixel/s and texture rate is 213.5 GTexel/s, versus 62.40 GPixel/s and 124.8 GTexel/s for the Intel part. In raw FP32 throughput, the Tesla M40 also leads with 6.832 TFLOPS compared to 3.994 TFLOPS for the Arc A530M. However, the Intel card offers FP16 support at 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the Tesla M40 has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory architecture diverges as well. The Arc A530M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Tesla M40 24 GB offers three times the capacity — 24 GB of GDDR5 — on a 384-bit bus, yielding 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card’s memory clock is 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the Intel part runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The higher effective speed on Intel’s GDDR6 partially compensates for the narrower bus, but the Tesla still pulls ahead in total bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A530M wins decisively in OpenCL compute workloads, as evidenced by its 32.8% advantage in that benchmark. This suggests it is better suited for general-purpose GPU computing tasks that leverage OpenCL — including physics simulations, video encoding pipelines, or scientific number-crunching. Its FP16 support at 7.987 TFLOPS also makes it attractive for workloads that can utilize reduced precision, potentially doubling throughput in machine learning inference or image processing tasks that tolerate FP16 arithmetic. The modern 6 nm process and Xe-HPG architecture bring features like ray tracing, which the Tesla M40 lacks entirely, making the Intel card the obvious choice for any application that requires hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB wins the Vulkan benchmark by 5.4%, indicating better performance in Vulkan-based applications. This could include Vulkan-rendered games or Vulkan compute APIs. Its massive 24 GB memory capacity is a clear advantage for workloads that need to hold very large datasets on the GPU — think big-batch inference, large 3D scene graphs, or data-intensive visualization. The 384-bit bus and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth also give it an edge in memory-bound scenarios, even if its raw FP32 throughput advantage (6.832 vs 3.994 TFLOPS) is not reflected in the average benchmark scores. The Tesla M40’s higher pixel rate (106.8 vs 62.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (213.5 vs 124.8 GTexel/s) suggest it could excel in fill-rate-limited rasterization tasks.

However, the data shows that these theoretical advantages do not translate to overall benchmark supremacy. The Arc A530M’s higher percentile rank (85th vs 83rd) and higher average score (46,614 vs 41,707) indicate that its architectural efficiency outweighs the Tesla’s brute-force compute counts in the tested workloads. The OpenCL delta is the single largest performance gap between the two cards, and it favors Intel by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences are numerous and significant. The Intel Arc A530M uses a 6 nm process, while the Tesla M40 24 GB uses 28 nm. Transistor counts are 11,500 million versus 8,000 million, and die sizes are 269 mm² versus 601 mm². The Arc A530M has a base clock of 900 MHz and boost clock of 1300 MHz; the Tesla M40 runs at 948 MHz base and 1112 MHz boost. Memory configurations differ: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus versus 24 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, with bandwidths of 224.0 GB/s and 288.4 GB/s respectively.

Shading units are 1,536 on the Intel card versus 3,072 on the NVIDIA card. TMUs are 96 versus 192, and ROPs are 48 versus 96. The Arc A530M includes 12 RT cores; the Tesla M40 has none. FP32 throughput is 3.994 TFLOPS for Intel and 6.832 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 is supported on the Intel card at 7.987 TFLOPS but is not listed for the Tesla. Power consumption differs dramatically: 65 W TDP for the Arc A530M versus 250 W for the Tesla M40. The Intel part is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a single-slot width, while the Tesla M40 is a dual-slot card requiring an 8-pin EPS power connector and a 600 W suggested PSU.

Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Intel card versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the NVIDIA. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" on the Arc A530M, while the Tesla M40 has no display outputs at all. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) on Intel versus 12 (12_1) on NVIDIA. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla M40 measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length. Production status is Active for Intel and End-of-life for NVIDIA. The release dates are 2023-07-31 for the Arc A530M and 2015-11-09 for the Tesla M40.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has a higher average benchmark score at 46,614, compared to the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB’s 41,707. The Intel card also ranks higher in percentile, at 85th versus 83rd.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: The Intel Arc A530M leads the Geekbench OpenCL test by 32.8%, scoring 49,735 versus the Tesla M40 24 GB’s 37,439 points. This is the single biggest performance difference between the two cards.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB wins the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 45,975 compared to the Intel Arc A530M’s 43,492, a 5.4% advantage.

Q: What are the memory capacity and bandwidth differences?

A: The Tesla M40 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc A530M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the Intel Arc A530M supports ray tracing, with 12 dedicated RT cores. The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB has no RT cores listed.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has a 65 W TDP, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB has a 250 W TDP. The Tesla M40 also requires an 8-pin EPS connector and a 600 W suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Arc A530M as the better overall performer for most users. It wins the OpenCL benchmark by a massive 32.8%, holds a higher average score (46,614 vs 41,707), and ranks in a higher percentile (85th vs 83rd). Its modern 6 nm process, ray tracing support, FP16 capability, and dramatically lower power draw (65 W vs 250 W) make it a more versatile and efficient choice. Applications that rely on OpenCL compute, ray tracing, or reduced-precision arithmetic will clearly favor the Intel card.

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB retains a narrow edge in Vulkan performance (5.4%) and offers significant advantages in memory capacity (24 GB vs 8 GB) and bandwidth (288.4 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s). Its higher shading unit count, TMU count, and ROP count, along with higher FP32 throughput, give it theoretical compute advantages that do not translate to benchmark victories in the tested workloads. For Vulkan-centric applications or workloads that require extremely large memory footprints, the Tesla M40 could still be relevant, but its end-of-life status and lack of modern features like ray tracing make it a less future-proof option.

The Intel Arc A530M is the clear choice for general-purpose computing, modern API support, and energy efficiency. The Tesla M40 24 GB is a niche pick for users who specifically need 24 GB of VRAM or Vulkan-tuned performance and can tolerate its higher power requirements and older architecture. The benchmark data favors Intel overall, and the performance delta in OpenCL is too large to ignore.