NVIDIA GeForce MX570 vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 and NVIDIA GeForce MX570 represent two very different eras of GPU design, yet their benchmark results place them in a surprisingly close contest. The Tesla M40, a professional compute card from 2015, edges out the 2021 mobile-centric MX570 in the single shared benchmark, but the data reveals a complex story of architectural trade-offs that go far beyond a simple score comparison. This analysis examines the numbers to determine what each GPU's strengths and weaknesses truly are.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable data point between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this benchmark, the NVIDIA Tesla M40 scores 39,192 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 scores 38,299 points. This gives the Tesla M40 a 2.3% advantage, a relatively narrow margin that is well within the range of day-to-day performance variance. The data shows a clear winner in the Tesla M40, but the small delta suggests that the MX570 is not far behind in raw compute throughput for this particular workload.

Looking at the broader context, the Tesla M40's average benchmark score of 41,897 places it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB, scores an average of 41,707, which is 0.5% lower. More interestingly, the M40 is 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, a much newer and more powerful gaming card, according to the data. Conversely, it trails the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE by 1.9%. These numbers suggest that the M40, despite its age, holds its own against surprisingly modern hardware in synthetic compute tests.

The MX570's average benchmark score of 38,299 puts it in the 81st percentile. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile, which scores 38,349, a mere 0.1% higher. The data also shows the MX570 is 0.4% ahead of the RTX 4080 Mobile and 1.1% behind the MX570 A variant. This positioning indicates that the MX570 sits at a performance tier comparable to top-end mobile GPUs in this specific test, which is a notable achievement for a low-power chip.

The 2.3% delta in the head-to-head test is the only direct comparison available. It implies that for general-purpose compute tasks, the older, larger Tesla M40 holds a slight edge. However, the sheer proximity of the scores—a difference of under 900 points—raises questions about the real-world impact of this lead, especially when considering the massive differences in power consumption and architecture between the two.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental difference between these GPUs lies in their architecture and process technology. The Tesla M40 is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture using the GM200 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This is a massive chip, with a die size of 601 mm² and housing 8,000 million transistors. The transistor density is 13.3 million per mm², which is typical for the era. In contrast, the MX570 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA107S chip, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. Its die size is a much smaller 200 mm², but it packs 8,700 million transistors, resulting in a significantly higher density of 43.5 million per mm². This represents a generational leap in manufacturing efficiency.

These architectural differences manifest in the core configurations. The Tesla M40 is a compute monster with 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 96 raster output units (ROPs). The MX570, while having fewer cores, introduces specialized hardware that the M40 lacks: it features 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. The M40 has no such dedicated units. This means the MX570 is capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads, while the M40 must rely on its raw shader horsepower.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The Tesla M40 is equipped with 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s. The MX570 has only 2 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, resulting in a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. The M40's memory subsystem offers nearly three times the bandwidth, which is crucial for data-intensive compute tasks. The MX570's advantage lies in its memory technology, but the narrow bus limits its overall throughput. The clock speeds are similar, with the M40 boosting to 1112 MHz and the MX570 to 1155 MHz, but the M40's much wider architecture allows for significantly higher fill rates: 106.8 GPixel/s and 213.5 GTexel/s for the M40 versus 36.96 GPixel/s and 73.92 GTexel/s for the MX570.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data and specifications paint a clear picture of distinct use cases. The Tesla M40 is designed for raw compute throughput. Its higher FP32 performance of 6.832 TFLOPS compared to the MX570's 4.731 TFLOPS, combined with its massive memory bandwidth and capacity, makes it the superior choice for tasks like rendering, scientific simulations, and large dataset processing. The 12 GB VRAM is critical for workloads that exceed the 2 GB limit of the MX570. In any synthetic compute benchmark that scales with memory or core count, the M40 will win.

The GeForce MX570, on the other hand, is built for efficiency and feature support. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the M40's 250 W, making it ideal for thin-and-light laptops where power and heat are primary constraints. The inclusion of ray tracing and tensor cores gives it a feature set that the M40 cannot match, even if its raw performance is lower. For applications that leverage these dedicated cores, such as DLSS upscaling or ray-traced effects in games, the MX570 would have a distinct advantage. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and PCIe 4.0 x8 also makes it more compatible with modern software ecosystems. The data shows the MX570's OpenCL score is close, but its value proposition is entirely different: it delivers capable performance within a power envelope that is impossible for the M40 to achieve.

The Verdict

The data dictates that the choice between these two GPUs depends entirely on the user's priorities. The Tesla M40 is the clear winner in pure compute performance, as evidenced by its 2.3% higher OpenCL score and its significantly superior specifications in memory bandwidth, capacity, and fill rates. If the task is compute-heavy and power consumption is not a concern, the M40 is the better choice based on the numbers. Its 83rd percentile ranking and close competition with modern cards like the RTX 3080 Ti underscore its enduring compute strength.

The GeForce MX570 wins on efficiency and modern features. It is not a direct competitor in the traditional sense but serves a different market segment. For a portable, low-power device, the MX570 offers a significant portion of the M40's compute performance—the OpenCL scores are within 2.3%—while consuming 15 W instead of 250 W. The presence of ray tracing and tensor cores, along with support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, makes it the more future-proof and versatile option for consumer applications. The verdict is not about which is "better" but which is better suited to the specific use case. For a desktop workstation with unlimited power, the M40 is the data-backed pick. For a laptop needing a balance of performance and battery life, the MX570 is the only viable option.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher score in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M40 scores 39,192, which is 2.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce MX570's score of 38,299.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 support ray tracing?

A: No, the Tesla M40 does not have any ray tracing cores. The GeForce MX570 features 16 ray tracing cores, which the M40 lacks.

Q: What is the difference in memory size between the two GPUs?

A: The Tesla M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GeForce MX570 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Tesla M40 has a TDP of 250 W and requires an 8-pin EPS power connector, while the GeForce MX570 has a TDP of 15 W and uses no power connectors, as it is an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor).

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 (single-precision) performance?

A: The Tesla M40 leads with 6.832 TFLOPS, compared to the GeForce MX570's 4.731 TFLOPS.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architectural generation?

A: No, the Tesla M40 is based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the GeForce MX570 is based on the Ampere architecture.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M40 | NVIDIA GeForce MX570 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 601 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.3M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 948 MHz | 832 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1112 MHz | 1155 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 192 | 64 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 106.8 GPixel/s | 36.96 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 213.5 GTexel/s | 73.92 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 6.832 TFLOPS | 4.731 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not specified | 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 8-pin EPS | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | Not specified |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |