GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 and the NVIDIA Tesla K40m represent two vastly different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm. The RTX 5050 is a modern Blackwell 2.0 consumer card, while the Tesla K40m is a legacy Kepler compute accelerator. The data shows a decisive victory for the newer card, with the RTX 5050 leading by 354.3% in the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL. The verdict is clear: for any modern workload, the RTX 5050 is the only rational choice, while the K40m remains a historical artifact with niche compute capabilities.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is the superior product for virtually all use cases. Its average benchmark score of 21,035 places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla K40m sits at 19,885 in the 65th percentile. The single head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL result shows the RTX 5050 scoring 90,334 against the K40m's 19,885, a 354.3% advantage. This is not a close contest; the RTX 5050 delivers over four and a half times the compute performance in this test.

The RTX 5050 is for gamers, content creators, and professionals needing a modern, feature-complete card with active production status. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and has dedicated RT and tensor cores, making it suitable for ray-traced gaming and AI workloads. The Tesla K40m, being end-of-life with no display outputs, is strictly a compute card for legacy CUDA applications. Its 12 GB of memory and 2880 shading units are its only advantages, but these are undermined by its 28 nm process node and dramatically lower clock speeds. The data suggests the K40m should only be considered for specialized, legacy compute tasks where its 12 GB frame buffer is absolutely required, and even then, its lack of modern API support (Vulkan 1.2.175, DirectX 12 (11_1)) is a severe limitation.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is generational. The RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring the GB207 chip. It packs 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 113.4M per mm². The Tesla K40m uses the Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process with the GK110B chip, containing 7,080 million transistors on a massive 561 mm² die, with a density of just 12.6M per mm². This process advantage explains the RTX 5050's superior efficiency and clock speeds.

The RTX 5050 features 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, which are entirely absent from the K40m. The newer card also has 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the K40m has 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the RTX 5050 achieves far higher performance due to its clock speeds: 2317 MHz base and 2572 MHz boost, versus the K40m's 745 MHz base and 876 MHz boost. Memory technology also differs significantly: the RTX 5050 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for 320.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the K40m uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus for 288.4 GB/s. The RTX 5050 supports PCIe 5.0 x8, while the K40m uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The K40m has no display outputs, whereas the RTX 5050 offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 5050 is overwhelmingly faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, it scores 90,334 versus the K40m's 19,885, a 354.3% difference. Its FP32 compute is 13.17 TFLOPS compared to the K40m's 5.046 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the Tesla K40m have any advantages?

A: Yes, in memory capacity. The K40m offers 12 GB of VRAM versus the RTX 5050's 8 GB, and it has a wider 384-bit memory bus. However, its total bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s is lower than the RTX 5050's 320.0 GB/s.

Q: Can the Tesla K40m be used for gaming?

A: The data suggests no. The K40m has no display outputs, meaning it cannot connect to a monitor. Furthermore, its API support is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175, which are outdated compared to the RTX 5050's DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The RTX 5050 is significantly more efficient. It has a TDP of 130 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W, while the K40m has a TDP of 245 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The RTX 5050 delivers far more performance while drawing nearly half the power.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The RTX 5050 is listed as "Active" in production, released on 2025-06-30. The Tesla K40m is "End-of-life," having been released on 2013-11-21, with its predecessor being Tesla Fermi and successor being Tesla Maxwell.

Q: Which card has better API support for modern applications?

A: The RTX 5050 is clearly superior. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The K40m only supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, lacking the features of DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 | NVIDIA Tesla K40m |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Kepler |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 16,900 million | 7,080 million |

| Die Size | 149 mm² | 561 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 113.4M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2317 MHz | 745 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2572 MHz | 876 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 320.0 GB/s | 288.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 2880 |

| TMUs | 80 | 240 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 20 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 80 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 82.30 GPixel/s | 52.56 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 205.8 GTexel/s | 210.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 13.17 TFLOPS | 5.046 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 13.17 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 130 W | 245 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | null |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b | No outputs |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-06-30 | 2013-11-21 |

| Launch MSRP | 249 USD | 7,699 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a landslide. The RTX 5050 scores 90,334, while the Tesla K40m manages just 19,885. This represents a 354.3% advantage for the RTX 5050, meaning it is roughly 4.5 times faster in this compute workload. This result aligns perfectly with the theoretical specifications: the RTX 5050's FP32 throughput of 13.17 TFLOPS dwarfs the K40m's 5.046 TFLOPS, and the newer card's 2572 MHz boost clock is nearly three times the K40m's 876 MHz.

While the K40m has more texture units (240 vs 80), its texture rate of 210.2 GTexel/s is only marginally higher than the RTX 5050's 205.8 GTexel/s. This near-parity in texture rate, despite the massive unit count difference, highlights the clock speed and architecture efficiency gains of the Blackwell design. The K40m's higher pixel rate is also notable, but at 52.56 GPixel/s versus 82.30 GPixel/s, the RTX 5050 still wins in that metric as well.

The RTX 5050's wins extend to its average benchmark score of 21,035, placing it in the 66th percentile, just ahead of the K40m's 19,885 in the 65th percentile. Interestingly, the RTX 5050's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% higher) and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (1.6% lower), showing it sits in a competitive mid-range segment. The K40m's nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W7000, which is only 0.1% slower, indicating the old Tesla card is firmly anchored in its legacy performance tier. The data is unambiguous: across every measurable metric except raw memory capacity and texture unit count, the RTX 5050 is the definitive winner.