NVIDIA L40S vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a decisive picture: the NVIDIA L40S outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 in every recorded test, with the largest margin appearing in compute-heavy workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the L40S scores 330,727 against 74,179 for the Quadro RTX 6000, a delta of 345.8%. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap that places the L40S in a completely different performance class.

The Vulkan results, while still favoring the L40S, show a narrower but substantial gap. The L40S records 260,799, while the Quadro RTX 6000 manages 129,564, yielding a 101.3% advantage. This means the L40S doubles the Quadro RTX 6000's performance in this API, a result that speaks to the architectural efficiency gains rather than just raw clock speed. Across both benchmarks, the L40S secures 2 wins, while the Quadro RTX 6000 records zero.

Context from the database's nearest rival analysis reinforces this dominance. The L40S sits in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 295,763. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation, trails by only 3%, while the NVIDIA L40 is 4.1% behind. The AMD Instinct MI300X, a high-end compute part, is 7% slower, and the NVIDIA H200 NVL is 11.7% slower. These figures show that the L40S is not merely faster than the Quadro RTX 6000; it is positioned at the very top of the performance hierarchy, competing with and beating accelerators designed for massive-scale compute.

The Quadro RTX 6000, by contrast, sits in the 94th percentile, with an average score of 101,872. Its nearest rivals are all AMD parts: the Radeon RX 7900M is 4.5% faster, the Radeon Pro VII is 4.9% faster, while the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo is 4.6% slower and the Radeon Pro W6600X is 5.1% slower. This places the Quadro RTX 6000 in a mid-range tier, competitive with contemporary workstation cards but fundamentally outclassed by the L40S. The 345.8% OpenCL delta is not a statistical anomaly; it reflects a profound difference in compute capability that no driver optimization or workload tuning could bridge.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The L40S is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD102 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro RTX 6000 uses the Turing architecture, with the TU102 chip, on a 12 nm process, also from TSMC. This process shrink alone accounts for significant efficiency and density improvements. The L40S packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 125.3 million per mm². The Quadro RTX 6000, with 18,600 million transistors on a larger 754 mm² die, achieves only 24.7 million per mm². The L40S has over four times the transistor density, which directly translates to more compute resources in a similar physical footprint.

Core counts reinforce this gap. The L40S features 18,176 shading units, 568 texture mapping units, and 192 raster output units. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The L40S has roughly four times the shading units and double the TMUs and ROPs. Ray tracing cores follow suit: the L40S has 142, while the Quadro RTX 6000 has 72. Tensor cores are the one area where the counts are close, with the L40S at 568 and the Quadro RTX 6000 at 576, but the L40S's tensor cores are from a newer generation with different capabilities. The FP32 compute rate tells the story: 91.61 TFLOPS for the L40S versus 16.31 TFLOPS for the Quadro RTX 6000. The L40S is 5.6 times faster in single-precision floating-point, a critical metric for scientific simulation and AI inference. FP16 performance is also divergent: the L40S achieves 91.61 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Quadro RTX 6000 reaches 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The L40S's 1:1 FP16 rate means it does not halve throughput when switching precision, a major advantage for mixed-precision workloads.

Memory architecture also differs. The L40S has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on the same 384-bit bus, but only 672.0 GB/s. The L40S offers double the capacity and 28.6% more bandwidth. Clock speeds complicate the picture: the Quadro RTX 6000 has a higher base clock (1440 MHz versus 1110 MHz) but a lower boost clock (1770 MHz versus 2520 MHz). The L40S's higher boost clock, combined with its massive core count, explains its overwhelming benchmark lead.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA L40S delivers 91.61 TFLOPS, which is 5.6 times the Quadro RTX 6000's 16.31 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each card have, and what is the bandwidth difference?

A: The L40S has 48 GB of GDDR6 with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 with 672.0 GB/s. The L40S has double the capacity and 28.6% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the process nodes for these GPUs?

A: The L40S uses a 5 nm TSMC process, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses a 12 nm TSMC process.

Q: In which benchmark does the L40S show its largest advantage?

A: The largest advantage is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the L40S scores 330,727 versus 74,179, a 345.8% delta.

Q: How do these cards compare in ray tracing cores?

A: The L40S has 142 RT cores, while the Quadro RTX 6000 has 72 RT cores. The L40S has nearly double the ray tracing hardware.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The L40S has a 300 W TDP, while the Quadro RTX 6000 has a 260 W TDP. The L40S consumes 15.4% more power but delivers significantly higher performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA L40S | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Turing |

| Chip | AD102 | TU102 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 76,300 million | 18,600 million |

| Die Size | 609 mm² | 754 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 125.3M / mm² | 24.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1110 MHz | 1440 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2520 MHz | 1770 MHz |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 864.0 GB/s | 672.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 18,176 | 4,608 |

| TMUs | 568 | 288 |

| ROPs | 192 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 142 | 72 |

| Tensor Cores | 568 | 576 |

| FP32 Compute | 91.61 TFLOPS | 16.31 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | 91.61 TFLOPS (1:1) | 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 260 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 600 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C |

| Release Date | 2022-10-12 | 2018-08-12 |

| Generation | Server Ada (Lxx) | Quadro Turing (Tx000) |

Where Each One Wins

The L40S wins in every compute category recorded in the database. Its 345.8% OpenCL lead and 101.3% Vulkan lead make it the clear choice for any workload that stresses raw GPU throughput. This includes scientific computing, AI model training and inference, rendering, and data analytics. The 48 GB memory capacity is double the Quadro RTX 6000's 24 GB, allowing larger datasets to reside on the GPU without host memory transfers. The 864.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures those large datasets can be fed to the compute units efficiently. The 5 nm process node and higher boost clock (2520 MHz versus 1770 MHz) contribute to the L40S's ability to sustain high performance under load.

The Quadro RTX 6000's wins are limited to specific specification comparisons, not performance benchmarks. It has a higher base clock (1440 MHz versus 1110 MHz), which could imply better efficiency at idle or low-load states. It also has more display outputs: four DisplayPort 1.4a and one USB Type-C, versus one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a on the L40S. For multi-display professional visualization setups, the Quadro RTX 6000 offers more connectivity options. Its lower TDP (260 W versus 300 W) and lower suggested PSU (600 W versus 700 W) might make it easier to integrate into existing systems with less robust power delivery. However, these are minor practical advantages against a massive performance deficit. The Quadro RTX 6000's 576 tensor cores are slightly more than the L40S's 568, but this numeric edge does not translate into a benchmark win; the newer tensor core design in Ada Lovelace is more efficient.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA L40S is the superior GPU for any compute-intensive task. Its average benchmark score of 295,763 places it in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro RTX 6000's 101,872 sits in the 94th percentile. The L40S outperforms the Quadro RTX 6000 by 345.8% in OpenCL and 101.3% in Vulkan. It has double the memory capacity, 28.6% more bandwidth, 5.6 times the FP32 throughput, and nearly double the RT cores. The architecture is newer, the process node is smaller, and the transistor density is over five times higher.

For users running AI workloads, scientific simulations, or high-resolution rendering, the L40S is the only rational choice from these two options. The 48 GB VRAM is essential for large language models or complex 3D scenes. The 91.61 TFLOPS FP32 rate handles double-precision-heavy tasks with ease. The 1:1 FP16 ratio means mixed-precision training does not suffer a throughput penalty.

The Quadro RTX 6000 retains relevance only in narrow, specific scenarios. Its four DisplayPort outputs and USB Type-C make it a better fit for multi-monitor professional visualization or VR setups that require diverse display connectivity. Its lower power draw and 600 W PSU requirement may suit legacy workstations with limited power headroom. The higher base clock suggests it might handle bursty, low-intensity tasks with less latency. But these are niche advantages. In any head-to-head compute comparison, the L40S wins decisively.

The recommendation is straightforward: choose the L40S for compute performance, memory capacity, and future-proofing. Choose the Quadro RTX 6000 only if display output flexibility and lower power consumption are non-negotiable requirements, and the performance gap is acceptable. The database records no metric where the Quadro RTX 6000 beats the L40S in a benchmark, making the L40S the default pick for any performance-driven decision.