NVIDIA Quadro M6000 vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 and NVIDIA Tesla M40 are sibling products built on the same GM200 silicon, yet they are aimed at different corners of the professional market. The data shows two nearly identical compute platforms, with the Quadro pulling ahead in the available benchmark results, while the Tesla offers a more specialized, display-less configuration. Both cards are end-of-life products from the Maxwell 2.0 era, and their performance characteristics reflect that shared heritage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In the two benchmark tests available, the Quadro M6000 wins outright. The largest margin comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the Quadro scores 46,913 against the Tesla M40’s 44,602. That is a 5.2% advantage for the Quadro, a meaningful gap in a compute-oriented workload that leverages the graphics pipeline. The OpenCL results are much closer: the Quadro posts 39,688 versus the Tesla’s 39,192, a slim 1.3% lead. Across both tests, the Quadro M6000 secures two wins, while the Tesla M40 takes none.

Looking at the broader context, the Quadro’s average benchmark score of 43,301 places it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival in that ranking is the GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile, which scores 43,268, a negligible 0.1% difference. The Quadro also sits just ahead of the GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223, 0.2% delta) and slightly behind the GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (43,667, -0.8% delta). The Tesla M40’s average score of 41,897 lands it in the 83rd percentile. Its closest competitor is the Tesla M40 24 GB at 41,707, a 0.5% gap, with the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41,187) trailing by 1.7% and the Radeon Pro 5300 (40,870) behind by 2.5%.

The delta between the two cards themselves is consistent with their clock speeds. The Quadro’s 5.2% Vulkan advantage is larger than its 1.3% OpenCL lead, suggesting the higher boost clock of 1,114 MHz (versus 1,112 MHz on the Tesla) is not the only factor; the Quadro’s memory runs at 6.6 Gbps effective compared to 6 Gbps on the Tesla, which likely contributes to the more pronounced Vulkan gap. In raw compute terms, the Quadro’s FP32 throughput of 6.844 TFLOPS edges out the Tesla’s 6.832 TFLOPS, a difference of less than 0.2%, so the benchmark deltas are larger than the theoretical peak would suggest. The pixel rate is nearly identical (106.9 GPixel/s vs 106.8 GPixel/s), as is the texture rate (213.9 GTexel/s vs 213.5 GTexel/s), reinforcing that these are the same GPU with different firmware and memory settings.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, using the GM200 chip fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The die size is identical at 601 mm², and both pack 8,000 million transistors, yielding the same transistor density of 13.3M per mm². The shading unit count is also identical at 3,072, with 192 texture mapping units and 96 raster output units on each card. Neither card features dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as those were introduced in later architectures.

The core clock speeds differ slightly. The Quadro M6000 has a base clock of 988 MHz and a boost clock of 1,114 MHz, while the Tesla M40 runs at 948 MHz base and 1,112 MHz boost. That 40 MHz base-clock difference is small but consistent with the Quadro’s slight performance edge. Memory clocks also diverge: the Quadro runs its GDDR5 at 1,653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) over a 384-bit bus, producing 317.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla M40 runs memory at 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) on the same 384-bit bus, yielding 288.4 GB/s. Both cards have 12 GB of GDDR5 VRAM, but the Quadro’s faster memory gives it a 10% bandwidth advantage, which explains part of the Vulkan score gap.

The most functional difference is in display outputs. The Quadro M6000 includes 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, making it a viable workstation card for driving multiple monitors. The Tesla M40 has no display outputs at all, positioning it as a pure compute accelerator for servers or render farms. Both cards use a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface and have a 250 W TDP with a suggested 600 W power supply, but the power connector differs: the Quadro uses a standard 1x 8-pin connector, while the Tesla uses an 8-pin EPS connector, which is typical for server power delivery. Physical dimensions are the same length (267 mm or 10.5 inches), but the Quadro is listed at 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height, while the Tesla’s height is not specified. Both are dual-slot cards.

The API support is identical: DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means software compatibility is the same, but the Tesla’s lack of display outputs makes it unsuitable for any workstation task requiring visual output. The Quadro belongs to the Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) generation, while the Tesla is part of the Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) generation. The Quadro’s predecessor is Quadro Kepler and its successor is Quadro Pascal; the Tesla’s predecessor is Tesla Kepler and its successor is Tesla Pascal. The release dates also differ: the Quadro launched on 2015-03-20, while the Tesla followed on 2015-11-09.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is clear: the Quadro M6000 outperforms the Tesla M40 in both available tests, with a 1.3% lead in OpenCL and a 5.2% lead in Vulkan. For users who need the highest possible compute scores on this generation of hardware, the Quadro is the better choice, particularly in Vulkan workloads where the faster memory and higher base clock translate into a more substantial advantage. The Quadro also offers display outputs, making it a dual-purpose card for both visualization and compute tasks.

The Tesla M40, however, is not without its place. Its average score of 41,897 is only 3.2% lower than the Quadro’s 43,301, and its percentile ranking of 83 versus 84 shows that the two are essentially in the same performance tier. The Tesla’s lack of display outputs is a feature in server environments where headless operation is standard and the 8-pin EPS power connector aligns with enterprise power delivery systems. For a compute-only deployment where the small performance delta is acceptable, the Tesla M40’s simpler configuration may be preferable. The data does not show any workload where the Tesla wins, but it does show that the gap is narrow enough to be irrelevant in many scaled-out server scenarios.

Users who need a workstation card with monitor outputs and the highest per-card performance should pick the Quadro M6000. Users building a dedicated compute cluster with no display requirement and a tolerance for slightly lower scores can choose the Tesla M40 without a significant penalty. The Quadro’s 5.2% Vulkan advantage is the single largest differentiator, so any workload that relies heavily on Vulkan compute should favor the Quadro.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 | NVIDIA Tesla M40 |

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

| Generation | Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) | Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) |

| Base Clock | 988 MHz | 948 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1114 MHz | 1112 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 317.4 GB/s | 288.4 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 106.9 GPixel/s | 106.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 213.9 GTexel/s | 213.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 6.844 TFLOPS | 6.832 TFLOPS |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |

| Height | 111 mm | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2015-03-20 | 2015-11-09 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Kepler | Tesla Kepler |

| Successor | Quadro Pascal | Tesla Pascal |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 39688 | 39192 |

| Geekbench Vulkan | 46913 | 44602 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 43301 | 41897 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 84 | 83 |

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The Quadro M6000 scores 46,913 in Vulkan, which is 5.2% higher than the Tesla M40’s 44,602.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both the Quadro M6000 and the Tesla M40 have 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, but the Quadro’s bandwidth is 317.4 GB/s versus 288.4 GB/s for the Tesla.

Q: Can the Tesla M40 be used to drive multiple monitors?

A: No, the Tesla M40 has no display outputs, while the Quadro M6000 offers 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 connections.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Quadro M6000 has an average benchmark score of 43,301, placing it in the 84th percentile. The Tesla M40 averages 41,897, which is in the 83rd percentile.

Q: Are the core counts the same on both cards?

A: Yes, both have 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, built on the GM200 chip with 8,000 million transistors.

Q: Which card has a higher base clock?

A: The Quadro M6000 has a base clock of 988 MHz, while the Tesla M40 runs at 948 MHz. The boost clocks are nearly identical at 1,114 MHz and 1,112 MHz, respectively.