NVIDIA A10M vs NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL benchmark provides a single, direct point of comparison between the NVIDIA A10M and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB. In this test, the A10M records a score of 135,230, while the Tesla P100 posts 79,396. This gives the A10M a decisive 70.3% advantage over the older card. That is a substantial margin, roughly translating to the A10M delivering more than two-thirds additional performance in this compute-oriented workload.

When placed against its nearest rivals, the A10M sits in a tight cluster. Its score of 135,230 is effectively identical to the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation, which averages 135,218, a delta of 0%. It also edges out the AMD Radeon PRO W6800, which scores 135,396, a difference of -0.1% from the A10M's perspective. The gap to the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo is slightly larger at -0.4%, and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 is -0.9% behind. This indicates the A10M is operating at the very top of its performance tier, with no rival in its immediate vicinity exceeding it by even a full percentage point.

The Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB, by contrast, sits in a lower performance band. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, scores 79,605, which is -0.3% relative to the 12 GB model. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is just ahead at 79,842, a -0.6% delta. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT is slightly behind at 78,940, a 0.6% delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X leads the group at 80,959, a -1.9% delta. The 12 GB Tesla P100 holds its own among these peers, but the group as a whole is far behind the A10M's league. The percentile ranking confirms this separation: the A10M sits in the 96th percentile among all GPUs, while the Tesla P100 is in the 92nd percentile. The A10M wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database, taking 1 win against 0 for the Tesla P100.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA A10M than the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB in OpenCL workloads?

A: The A10M scores 135,230 versus 79,396 for the Tesla P100, a 70.3% advantage. This is the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, and it favors the A10M decisively.

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput in FP32 operations?

A: The A10M delivers 23.44 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Tesla P100 provides 9.526 TFLOPS. The A10M more than doubles the FP32 throughput of the older card.

Q: How do the two cards compare in FP16 performance?

A: The A10M achieves 23.44 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The Tesla P100 reaches 19.05 TFLOPS in FP16, but at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it trades off FP32 throughput to reach that number.

Q: What are the memory capacities and types of each card?

A: The A10M has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus, yielding 500.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla P100 has 12 GB of HBM2 memory on a 3072-bit bus, yielding 549.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite having less capacity, the Tesla P100 has higher raw memory bandwidth.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The A10M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla P100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The A10M has a more recent DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: How do their power requirements differ?

A: The A10M has a TDP of 150 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The Tesla P100 has a TDP of 250 W and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The A10M draws less power and requires a smaller power supply.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA A10M is built on the GA102 chip using the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process by Samsung. It packs 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The Tesla P100 uses the GP100 chip with the Pascal architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 16 nm process. It contains 15,300 million transistors on a 610 mm² die, giving a density of 25.1 million per mm². The A10M therefore benefits from a newer, denser manufacturing process, allowing it to fit nearly double the transistors in a similar die area.

The compute resources differ sharply. The A10M features 7,168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 ROPs. It also includes 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores, reflecting the Ampere generation's focus on accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The Tesla P100 has 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores, as Pascal predates NVIDIA's dedicated hardware for these tasks. The pixel rate is close, with the A10M at 130.8 GPixel/s and the Tesla P100 at 127.6 GPixel/s, but the texture rate favors the A10M at 366.2 GTexel/s versus 297.7 GTexel/s.

Memory technology also separates the two. The A10M uses GDDR6, while the Tesla P100 uses HBM2. The A10M's memory runs at 1563 MHz, or 12.5 Gbps effective, across a 320-bit bus. The Tesla P100's memory runs at 715 MHz, or 1430 Mbps effective, across a much wider 3072-bit bus. This explains why the Tesla P100 achieves higher bandwidth despite slower clock speeds: the bus width is nearly ten times larger. The A10M compensates with more capacity, 20 GB versus 12 GB, which is often more important than raw bandwidth for large datasets.

The bus interface also differs. The A10M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Tesla P100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both cards have no display outputs, indicating their intended role as compute accelerators rather than graphics cards. In terms of production status, both are end-of-life, but the Tesla P100 has a recorded release date of June 19, 2016, while the A10M has no release date in the database. The A10M's predecessor is Tesla Turing, and its successor is Server Ada. The Tesla P100's predecessor is Tesla Maxwell, and its successor is Tesla Volta.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every major specification. The A10M has a base clock of 975 MHz and a boost clock of 1635 MHz, while the Tesla P100 has a higher base clock of 1190 MHz but a lower boost clock of 1329 MHz. The A10M's boost clock is substantially higher, which contributes to its performance advantage.

Memory capacity favors the A10M at 20 GB versus 12 GB for the Tesla P100. The memory type differs, GDDR6 versus HBM2, as does the bus width, 320 bit versus 3072 bit. Bandwidth favors the Tesla P100 at 549.1 GB/s versus 500.2 GB/s for the A10M, a modest difference of about 10%.

Compute resources favor the A10M heavily in shading units, with 7,168 versus 3,584, and in TMUs, with 224 versus 224 being equal. The ROP count favors the Tesla P100 at 96 versus 80. The A10M has 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores, while the Tesla P100 has none of either. FP32 throughput is 23.44 TFLOPS for the A10M versus 9.526 TFLOPS for the Tesla P100. FP16 throughput is 23.44 TFLOPS for the A10M versus 19.05 TFLOPS for the Tesla P100, but the ratio differs: 1:1 for the A10M and 2:1 for the Tesla P100.

Power consumption favors the A10M, with a TDP of 150 W versus 250 W for the Tesla P100. The suggested PSU is 450 W versus 600 W. The slot width differs, with the A10M being single-slot and the Tesla P100 dual-slot. The power connectors also differ, with the A10M using an 8-pin EPS and the Tesla P100 using a single 8-pin. Both cards are 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, but the A10M has a recorded height of 112 mm (4.4 inches), while the Tesla P100's height is not recorded.

API support differs slightly. The A10M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Tesla P100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the A10M supports Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.3 for the Tesla P100. The A10M is in the Server Ampere (Axx) generation, while the Tesla P100 is in the Tesla Pascal (Pxx) generation. The A10M has no launch MSRP recorded, while the Tesla P100 has a launch MSRP of 4,599 USD.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous in this comparison. The NVIDIA A10M outperforms the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB by 70.3% in the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL. It also offers more memory, 20 GB versus 12 GB, and significantly higher FP32 compute, 23.44 TFLOPS versus 9.526 TFLOPS. The A10M achieves this while drawing less power, 150 W versus 250 W, and occupying a single slot instead of two. Its newer architecture, Ampere versus Pascal, brings ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, none of which are available on the Tesla P100.

The Tesla P100 does have a few advantages in the recorded specifications. It offers higher memory bandwidth, 549.1 GB/s versus 500.2 GB/s, due to its HBM2 memory and wide 3072-bit bus. It also has more ROPs, 96 versus 80, and a higher base clock, 1190 MHz versus 975 MHz. However, these advantages do not translate into a benchmark win. The A10M's higher boost clock, more than double the shading units, and tensor core acceleration give it a commanding lead in the measured workload.

For buyers choosing between these two end-of-life accelerators, the A10M is the clear choice for compute-intensive tasks. Its higher OpenCL score, larger memory pool, and lower power draw make it the more capable and efficient card. The Tesla P100 retains a niche for workloads that specifically require HBM2 bandwidth, but even that advantage is small, roughly 10%, and comes with older architecture, less memory, and higher power consumption. The A10M sits in the 96th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla P100 sits in the 92nd, a gap that reflects the substantial performance difference recorded in the database.