Intel Arc A730M vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

The Intel Arc A730M and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape, yet they land surprisingly close in overall benchmark averages. The Arc A730M, an end-of-life mobile part built on TSMC’s 6 nm process, delivers modern feature support and a decisive performance edge in the two compute workloads where they overlap. The Tesla M40, a dual-slot 2015-era accelerator with no display outputs, counters with raw memory bandwidth from a 384-bit bus and a much higher power ceiling. The data shows a clear winner in raw speed, but the story is more nuanced when considering the context of each card’s intended role.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A730M wins every shared benchmark in the data. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 70,352 against the Tesla M40’s 39,192, a 79.5% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc A730M posts 64,693 versus 44,602 for the Tesla M40, a 45% lead. These results are not close; the Arc A730M is 1.8x faster in OpenCL and 1.45x faster in Vulkan. For any workload that leverages these APIs, the Intel part is the clear performer.

The Tesla M40, despite losing both head-to-head tests, does hold some structural advantages. Its 384-bit memory bus provides 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, which is lower than the Arc A730M’s 336.0 GB/s, but the M40’s 12 GB of GDDR5 is matched in capacity. The M40 also has a much higher TDP at 250 W versus 80 W, allowing for sustained throughput in server environments where power is less constrained. However, the benchmark data does not show any test where the M40 wins. Its wins are theoretical, based on its design as a compute accelerator with no display outputs and a dual-slot form factor intended for rack-mounted systems.

The Arc A730M’s wins are not just about raw scores. Its 84th percentile ranking versus all GPUs is slightly higher than the M40’s 83rd percentile. The average benchmark score of 45,592 for the Arc A730M also exceeds the M40’s 41,897. In terms of nearest rivals, the Arc A730M sits within 1% of cards like the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation and the RTX A2000, while the M40 is within 2.5% of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 and 1.7% of the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti. This placement suggests the Arc A730M competes with much newer hardware, whereas the M40 holds its own against a mix of older and mid-range parts.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The Intel Arc A730M uses the Xe-HPG architecture on the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA Tesla M40 uses the older Maxwell 2.0 architecture on the GM200 chip, built on a 28 nm process. It contains 8,000 million transistors on a larger 601 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 13.3 million per mm². This process advantage allows the Arc A730M to nearly triple the transistor count while using a smaller die.

Core configurations are identical in count but differ in capability. Both GPUs feature 3072 shading units and 192 TMUs. The Arc A730M has a higher pixel rate at 196.8 GPixel/s versus 106.8 GPixel/s for the M40, and a higher texture rate at 393.6 GTexel/s versus 213.5 GTexel/s. The Arc A730M also includes 24 ray tracing cores, a feature the M40 lacks entirely. Tensor cores are absent from both parts. The Arc A730M’s FP32 throughput is 12.60 TFLOPS, nearly double the M40’s 6.832 TFLOPS. Additionally, the Arc A730M supports FP16 at 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1), while the M40 has no FP16 capability listed.

Memory subsystems differ in type and bandwidth. The Arc A730M uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 336.0 GB/s. The M40 uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, achieving 288.4 GB/s. The Arc A730M’s narrower bus is offset by faster memory clocks, with 14 Gbps effective versus 6 Gbps effective on the M40. Clock speeds also favor Intel: the Arc A730M runs at 1100 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost, while the M40 runs at 948 MHz base and 1112 MHz boost. The M40’s 250 W TDP is more than triple the Arc A730M’s 80 W, yet it delivers far less compute performance per watt.

Feature support is where the gap widens further. The Arc A730M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The M40 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1), though it matches OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 on the Arc A730M versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on the M40. The Arc A730M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with portable device-dependent outputs, while the M40 is a dual-slot card with no display outputs, requiring an 8-pin EPS connector and a 600 W suggested PSU. The M40 measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, whereas the Arc A730M’s dimensions are not specified.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Arc A730M outperforms the NVIDIA Tesla M40 in every measured benchmark. The 79.5% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and 45% lead in Geekbench Vulkan are substantial margins that cannot be offset by the M40’s larger memory bus or higher TDP. For any user comparing these two based on compute performance alone, the Arc A730M is the superior choice. Its 84th percentile ranking versus all GPUs, combined with a 45,592 average benchmark score, places it in a competitive tier with modern workstation and mobile parts.

The Tesla M40 is not without merit, but its strengths are contextual. As a server accelerator with no display outputs, it is designed for headless compute environments. Its 12 GB of GDDR5 memory and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for certain workloads, and its 250 W TDP suggests it can sustain heavy loads. However, the benchmark data shows it trailing the Arc A730M by a wide margin. The M40’s 83rd percentile ranking and 41,897 average score put it in a lower performance class. Its nearest rivals include the Tesla M40 24 GB, which is only 0.5% faster, and the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, which is 1.7% faster. None of these rivals close the gap to the Arc A730M.

For a mobile or compact system, the Arc A730M is the clear pick. It delivers nearly double the FP32 throughput (12.60 TFLOPS versus 6.832 TFLOPS), supports ray tracing, and consumes 170 W less power. For a dedicated compute server with available power and no need for display output, the M40 remains a functional but dated option. The data favors Intel decisively, making the Arc A730M the recommended choice for anyone prioritizing benchmark performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A730M has an average benchmark score of 45,592, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 scores 41,897.

Q: How much faster is the Arc A730M in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Arc A730M scores 70,352 versus 39,192 for the M40, a delta of 79.5%.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 support ray tracing?

A: No. The M40 has no ray tracing cores listed, while the Arc A730M includes 24 RT cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Arc A730M has 336.0 GB/s from 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The M40 has 288.4 GB/s from 12 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The Arc A730M has 53.4 million transistors per mm², versus 13.3 million per mm² for the M40.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes, both the Intel Arc A730M and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 are listed as end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmarks tell a consistent story of Intel dominance. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc A730M posts 70,352 points, a score that dwarfs the M40’s 39,192. This 79.5% delta represents the largest performance gap between the two cards. The Arc A730M’s higher FP32 throughput of 12.60 TFLOPS versus 6.832 TFLOPS likely drives this result, as OpenCL workloads often scale with raw compute. The M40’s older Maxwell architecture, with its lower clock speeds and lack of FP16 support, cannot keep pace.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc A730M again wins with 64,693 points against 44,602 for the M40, a 45% advantage. This smaller but still decisive gap reflects the Arc A730M’s modern API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The M40’s Vulkan support is present, but its Maxwell 2.0 architecture lacks the feature set needed to match the Intel part. The Arc A730M’s 24 RT cores and higher texture rate of 393.6 GTexel/s versus 213.5 GTexel/s contribute to its stronger graphics compute performance.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the Arc A730M also holds a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1732, a test the M40 does not appear in. This additional data point reinforces the Intel card’s lead in modern graphics workloads. The M40’s only strengths are its larger physical footprint and higher power draw, neither of which translate into benchmark wins. The head-to-head results show a 2-0 sweep for the Arc A730M, with no test favoring the Tesla M40. For anyone relying on these metrics, the choice is straightforward.