NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs NVIDIA Tesla M4 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation compare to the NVIDIA Tesla M4 in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 18954, while the Tesla M4 scores 16932. This places the RTX 2000 Ada Generation at the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, with the Tesla M4 slightly behind at the 60th percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the RTX 2000 Ada Generation according to the database?

A: The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (average score 19030, delta -0.4%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (average score 19036, delta -0.4%), the NVIDIA Tesla K80 (average score 18866, delta 0.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (average score 19049, delta -0.5%).

Q: What is the only head-to-head benchmark shared between these two cards?

A: The database contains a single shared benchmark: Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation scores 78074, while the Tesla M4 scores 16932, resulting in a 361.1% advantage for the RTX 2000 Ada Generation.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is listed as Active, while the NVIDIA Tesla M4 is listed as End-of-life.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density, and by how much?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a transistor density of 118.9M per mm², compared to the Tesla M4's 12.9M per mm². The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is fabricated on a 5 nm process, while the Tesla M4 uses a 28 nm process.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Tesla M4 supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 represent two very different eras of GPU design. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is built on the AD107 chip using the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The Tesla M4 uses the GM206 chip with the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a much older 28 nm process. This process gap is reflected in the transistor counts: the RTX 2000 Ada Generation packs 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, while the Tesla M4 fits only 2,940 million transistors on a larger 228 mm² die.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation belongs to the Workstation Ada (x000A) generation and is the successor to Workstation Ampere, with Blackwell PRO W listed as its successor. The Tesla M4 belongs to the Tesla Maxwell (Mxx) generation, with Tesla Kepler as its predecessor and Tesla Pascal as its successor. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation was released on 2024-02-11, while the Tesla M4 was released on 2015-11-09.

Feature support differs substantially. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation includes 22 ray tracing cores and 88 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Tesla M4, which has no RT cores and no tensor cores listed. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Tesla M4 maxes out at DirectX 12 (12_1) with Vulkan 1.4. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses GDDR6 memory with 16 GB capacity and a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla M4 uses GDDR5 with 4 GB capacity and an equally wide 128-bit bus, but only achieves 88.00 GB/s. The memory clock speeds also differ: the RTX 2000 Ada Generation runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the Tesla M4 runs at 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective).

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a dual-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and no power connectors. The Tesla M4 is a single-slot card with no display outputs. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Tesla M4 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation for nearly every use case. In the single shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 2000 Ada Generation scores 78074 against the Tesla M4's 16932, a 361.1% advantage. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also has a higher average benchmark score (18954 vs 16932) and sits at a higher percentile (63rd vs 60th).

For compute-heavy workloads, the RTX 2000 Ada Generation delivers 12.00 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 12.00 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (1:1 ratio). The Tesla M4 manages 2.195 TFLOPS of FP32 and has no listed FP16 capability. Memory capacity is four times larger on the RTX 2000 Ada Generation (16 GB vs 4 GB), and bandwidth is nearly three times higher (256.0 GB/s vs 88.00 GB/s).

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is the only viable choice for users who need display outputs, as the Tesla M4 offers no display outputs at all. Users requiring ray tracing or tensor core acceleration must also select the RTX 2000 Ada Generation, as the Tesla M4 lacks both. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation remains in active production, while the Tesla M4 is end-of-life.

The Tesla M4 does have one advantage: lower power consumption at 50 W versus 70 W, and a single-slot form factor versus dual-slot. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also requires a 250 W suggested PSU, the same as the Tesla M4. For a database-driven recommendation, the RTX 2000 Ada Generation is the clear winner for performance, features, and longevity.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | NVIDIA Tesla M4 |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 18,900 million | 2,940 million |

| Die Size | 159 mm² | 228 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 118.9M / mm² | 12.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1620 MHz | 872 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2130 MHz | 1072 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 88.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2816 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 88 | 64 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 22 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 88 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 102.2 GPixel/s | 34.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 187.4 GTexel/s | 68.61 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.00 TFLOPS | 2.195 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 12.00 TFLOPS (1:1) | None |

| TDP | 70 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

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

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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one shared benchmark between the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and the NVIDIA Tesla M4: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the RTX 2000 Ada Generation scores 78074, while the Tesla M4 scores 16932. The delta is a decisive 361.1% in favor of the RTX 2000 Ada Generation.

This single result is consistent with the broader specification differences. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation's FP32 throughput of 12.00 TFLOPS is roughly 5.5 times the Tesla M4's 2.195 TFLOPS. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: 187.4 GTexel/s versus 68.61 GTexel/s. Pixel rate shows a 102.2 GPixel/s to 34.30 GPixel/s gap.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also wins on memory bandwidth by a wide margin, 256.0 GB/s versus 88.00 GB/s, which directly benefits OpenCL workloads that are often memory-bound. The 16 GB frame buffer on the RTX 2000 Ada Generation provides four times the capacity of the Tesla M4's 4 GB, a significant advantage for large datasets.

The Tesla M4's only recorded win is its lower TDP of 50 W versus 70 W. However, this advantage does not translate into a benchmark victory in the shared test. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also maintains a higher average benchmark score of 18954 compared to the Tesla M4's 16932, a difference of approximately 12%. Its percentile ranking of 63 places it above the Tesla M4's 60th percentile.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation's nearest rivals in the database, the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 and AMD Radeon RX 6600, both score within 0.4% of its average. The Tesla M4's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon HD 7970M, is just 0.5% ahead, while the NVIDIA T400 4 GB trails by 0.8%. These proximity values show that the RTX 2000 Ada Generation competes in a more modern performance tier, while the Tesla M4 remains anchored to older hardware.