GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 and the NVIDIA Tesla K40c are separated by a decade of GPU architecture, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm. The RTX 4060 dominates the only shared test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, scoring 95,057 points against the K40c's 17,468. This is a 444.2% delta in favor of the newer card, a margin so large it effectively places these products in different performance tiers despite both holding the 61st percentile ranking among all GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is brief, as the two cards only share one benchmark result in the data: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the RTX 4060 delivers a score of 95,057, while the Tesla K40c manages 17,468. The delta of 444.2% is a massive generational leap. For context, the RTX 4060's average benchmark score of 17,639 is nearly identical to the K40c's 17,468, but that average includes a wide range of tests. The OpenCL result is the only direct apples-to-apples comparison available, and it is a complete rout.

The RTX 4060 also shows its strength across its broader benchmark suite. In PassMark G3D, it scores 19,545, and in PassMark GPU Compute, it hits 9,213. It also posts 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,302. The Tesla K40c has no corresponding results in these tests within the data, so its performance there is unquantified. However, the Geekbench OpenCL result alone is sufficient to establish the performance hierarchy. The K40c's single score of 17,468 is comparable to the RTX 4060's average of 17,639 only because the RTX 4060's average is pulled down by its lower scores in legacy DirectX tests, such as PassMark DirectX 9 (236) and PassMark DirectX 10 (103).

The Verdict

For any modern workload, the RTX 4060 is the clear choice. The data shows a 444.2% lead in the only shared benchmark, which is an insurmountable advantage. The RTX 4060 also brings modern feature support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and ray tracing cores, none of which the K40c offers. The K40c's sole advantage is its 12 GB of memory versus the RTX 4060's 8 GB, and its 384-bit bus width provides slightly higher peak bandwidth at 288.4 GB/s versus 272.0 GB/s. However, that memory advantage does not translate into compute performance, as the OpenCL result demonstrates.

The RTX 4060 is for anyone building a gaming PC or a workstation that needs current API support and high compute throughput. The Tesla K40c is a relic from the Kepler era, with no display outputs and a 245 W TDP. Its 12 GB of VRAM might be attractive for certain large-memory compute tasks, but its 5.046 TFLOPS FP32 performance is less than a third of the RTX 4060's 15.11 TFLOPS. The verdict is simple: the RTX 4060 is the superior product in nearly every measurable way, and the K40c should only be considered for legacy compute tasks that specifically require its memory configuration. The RTX 4060 launches with an MSRP of 299 USD, while the K40c launched at 7,699 USD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is the primary driver of the performance difference. The RTX 4060 uses the AD107 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 18,900 million transistors onto a 159 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.9M per mm². This is a remarkably dense design. The Tesla K40c, in contrast, uses the GK180 chip on the Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process. It has 7,080 million transistors on a much larger 561 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of just 12.6M per mm². The K40c's older process and lower density mean it cannot compete in raw compute efficiency.

The RTX 4060 features 3,072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 ray tracing cores, and 96 tensor cores. The K40c has 2,880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, but it lacks dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores entirely. This means the RTX 4060 can accelerate ray-traced workloads and AI inference tasks, while the K40c cannot. The K40c's higher TMU count gives it a texture rate of 210.2 GTexel/s, which is close to the RTX 4060's 236.2 GTexel/s, but the RTX 4060's pixel rate of 118.1 GPixel/s is more than double the K40c's 52.56 GPixel/s.

Clock speeds also differ dramatically. The RTX 4060 runs at a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 2460 MHz. The K40c is limited to a 745 MHz base and an 876 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the architectural improvements, is why the RTX 4060 achieves 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 versus the K40c's 5.046 TFLOPS. The RTX 4060 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (15.11 TFLOPS), while the K40c has no FP16 data available.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ significantly in nearly every specification. The RTX 4060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 272.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla K40c uses 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 288.4 GB/s. While the K40c has more memory and slightly higher bandwidth, the RTX 4060's memory runs at a much higher effective speed of 17 Gbps versus the K40c's 6 Gbps.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The RTX 4060 has a TDP of 115 W and requires a single 12-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W PSU. The K40c has a TDP of 245 W, needs a 6-pin plus an 8-pin connector, and recommends a 550 W PSU. This means the RTX 4060 delivers far more performance per watt.

Other differences include the bus interface: the RTX 4060 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the K40c uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The RTX 4060 has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the K40c has no display outputs, making it unusable for a standard desktop setup. The RTX 4060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The K40c supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Physical dimensions also differ: the RTX 4060 is 240 mm long, while the K40c is 267 mm long. Both are dual-slot cards. The RTX 4060 was released on 2023-05-17, while the K40c was released on 2013-10-07.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The RTX 4060 is significantly faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 95,057 versus the K40c's 17,468, a 444.2% advantage.

Q: Does the Tesla K40c have any advantage over the RTX 4060?

A: Yes, it has a larger memory pool of 12 GB versus 8 GB, and its 384-bit bus gives it a slightly higher peak bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s versus 272.0 GB/s.

Q: Can the Tesla K40c be used for gaming?

A: No, the K40c has no display outputs, so it cannot connect to a monitor. It is designed for compute tasks only.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the RTX 4060 supports ray tracing, as it has 24 dedicated ray tracing cores. The K40c has no ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 4060 has a 115 W TDP and suggests a 300 W PSU with a single 12-pin connector. The K40c has a 245 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU with a 6-pin and 8-pin connector.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The RTX 4060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the K40c only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4060 wins in every compute benchmark category where both have data, and it is the only card suitable for modern gaming or graphics work. Its 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 24 ray tracing cores, and 96 tensor cores make it capable of handling real-time ray tracing and AI-accelerated features. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, and its low 115 W TDP means it is easy to cool and power. The dual-slot design and 240 mm length fit in most cases, and the display outputs allow direct monitor connection.

The Tesla K40c's only theoretical win is in scenarios where its 12 GB memory capacity is essential and the workload is not compute-intensive in the way the OpenCL test measures. Its 384-bit memory bus and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth could be useful for specific large-buffer tasks, but its 5.046 TFLOPS FP32 performance is a severe limitation. The K40c's lack of display outputs, higher power draw, and older API support make it a poor choice for any modern application. The data is clear: the RTX 4060 is the winner in 1 out of 1 head-to-head benchmarks, with a decisive 444.2% margin.