NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 vs NVIDIA Tesla K40m Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla K40m records an average benchmark score of 19,885, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 averages 17,639. The Tesla K40m sits at the 65th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the RTX 4060's 61st percentile.

Q: How significant is the RTX 4060's OpenCL performance advantage?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 4060 scores 95,057 versus the Tesla K40m's 19,885. That is a delta of -79.1% from the RTX 4060's perspective, meaning the RTX 4060 is roughly 4.8 times faster in this specific workload.

Q: What are the architectural generations of these two cards?

A: The Tesla K40m is based on the Kepler architecture (chip GK110B) built on a 28 nm process. The RTX 4060 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture (chip AD107) built on a 5 nm process. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Q: Which card has more memory, and what type?

A: The Tesla K40m has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Tesla K40m has a TDP of 245 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The RTX 4060 has a TDP of 115 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Does the RTX 4060 support modern rendering features that the Tesla K40m lacks?

A: Yes. The RTX 4060 has 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), and includes Vulkan 1.4. The Tesla K40m has no RT or tensor cores and supports DirectX 12 (11_1) with Vulkan 1.2.175.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent a decade of architectural evolution. The Tesla K40m uses the GK110B chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, packing 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die. The RTX 4060 uses the AD107 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, with 18,900 million transistors in a much smaller 159 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story: 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter for Kepler versus 118.9 million for Ada Lovelace.

The shading unit counts are similar on paper: the Tesla K40m has 2,880 shading units, while the RTX 4060 has 3,072. But the TMU counts differ sharply, 240 for the K40m versus 96 for the RTX 4060, and both have 48 ROPs. The RTX 4060 adds 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores, features completely absent from the Kepler design.

Clock speeds show the process advantage. The Tesla K40m runs at a 745 MHz base and 876 MHz boost. The RTX 4060 runs at 1,830 MHz base and 2,460 MHz boost. Memory clocks also diverge: the K40m's GDDR5 runs at 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the RTX 4060's GDDR6 runs at 2,125 MHz (17 Gbps effective).

The API support differs substantially. The Tesla K40m lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 4060 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 4060 also includes display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the Tesla K40m has no display outputs at all, reflecting its compute-focused design.

The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Tesla K40m versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX 4060. The Tesla K40m uses a dual-slot cooler and measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length. The RTX 4060 is also dual-slot but shorter at 240 mm (9.4 inches), with specified dimensions of 111 mm height and 40 mm width.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different use cases. The Tesla K40m, released in November 2013, is a Kepler-generation compute card with 12 GB of GDDR5 and a 384-bit bus. Its average benchmark score of 19,885 places it at the 65th percentile, just ahead of the AMD FirePro W7000 by 0.1% and the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT by 0.6%. For legacy compute workloads that rely on raw FP32 throughput and large memory pools, the K40m's 5.046 TFLOPS and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth remain relevant, but its DirectX 12 (11_1) support and lack of RT cores limit modern gaming use.

The RTX 4060, released in May 2023, is the more balanced card. Despite a lower average benchmark score of 17,639 (61st percentile), it dominates in the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 95,057 versus the K40m's 19,885. The RTX 4060's 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores make it the clear choice for ray tracing, DLSS-style workloads, and modern API support. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (-0.2%), the AMD Radeon 780M (+0.3%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (+0.5%), showing it clusters tightly with mid-range parts.

Who should pick which? The RTX 4060 is the pick for anyone needing current API support, ray tracing, and vastly higher OpenCL compute performance, all at a far lower power draw (115 W versus 245 W) and shorter physical length. The Tesla K40m is the pick for legacy compute tasks that need 12 GB of VRAM and a 384-bit memory bus, or for systems already built around PCIe 3.0 and Kepler-era software stacks. For gaming or modern productivity, the RTX 4060's feature set and benchmark results make it the stronger recommendation.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. Process node: 28 nm for the Tesla K40m versus 5 nm for the RTX 4060. Transistor count: 7,080 million versus 18,900 million. Die size: 561 mm² versus 159 mm². Transistor density: 12.6M per mm² versus 118.9M per mm².

Clocks: base 745 MHz versus 1,830 MHz, boost 876 MHz versus 2,460 MHz, memory 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 2,125 MHz (17 Gbps effective). Memory: 12 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus versus 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. Bandwidth: 288.4 GB/s versus 272.0 GB/s.

Compute resources: shading units 2,880 versus 3,072, TMUs 240 versus 96, ROPs 48 versus 48. The RTX 4060 adds 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores. Pixel rate: 52.56 GPixel/s versus 118.1 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 210.2 GTexel/s versus 236.2 GTexel/s. FP32: 5.046 TFLOPS versus 15.11 TFLOPS. The RTX 4060 also lists FP16 at 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1), while the K40m has no FP16 entry.

Power and cooling: TDP 245 W versus 115 W, suggested PSU 550 W versus 300 W. The RTX 4060 uses a 1x 12-pin power connector, while the K40m lists none. The RTX 4060 has display outputs, the K40m has none. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Dimensions: 267 mm length versus 240 mm length, with the RTX 4060 adding height and width specifications.

The launch MSRP for the Tesla K40m is 7,699 USD. The launch MSRP for the RTX 4060 is 299 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The RTX 4060 scores 95,057, while the Tesla K40m scores 19,885, giving the RTX 4060 a delta of -79.1% (interpreted as the K40m being 79.1% behind). This is the single head-to-head data point, and it shows a massive generational leap in compute throughput.

The RTX 4060's additional benchmark suite paints a fuller picture. In Passmark G3D, it scores 19,545, nearly matching the K40m's average of 19,885. In Passmark GPU Compute, the RTX 4060 scores 9,213. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 48,643, and its DirectX tests range from 76 (DirectX 12) to 236 (DirectX 9) in Passmark.

The Tesla K40m's nearest rivals in the database are all AMD workstation cards: the FirePro W7000 at 19,905 (-0.1%), the Radeon RX 6650 XT at 19,765 (+0.6%), the FirePro D300 at 19,637 (+1.3%), and the Quadro K5200 at 19,602 (+1.4%). This places the K40m at the top of its immediate competitive cluster, though the margins are tight, all within 1.4%.

The RTX 4060's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790 at 17,666 (-0.2%), the AMD Radeon 780M at 17,588 (+0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17,551 (+0.5%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 at 17,509 (+0.7%). The RTX 4060 sits slightly below the HD 7790 but above the integrated Radeon 780M, indicating a mid-pack position among its peers.

The benchmark delta in OpenCL is the clearest signal: the RTX 4060 is roughly 4.8 times faster than the Tesla K40m in that workload. That kind of margin reflects not just clock speed improvements (2.8x boost) but also architectural efficiency gains from the 5 nm process and Ada Lovelace's compute design. The K40m's higher average benchmark score, despite losing the head-to-head, comes from its percentile positioning and the specific mix of tests in the database.