NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

# NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile vs NVIDIA Tesla M40

The NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile and NVIDIA Tesla M40 represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by nearly seven years of architectural evolution. The A1000 Mobile, an Ampere-based laptop part from 2022, wins both available head-to-head benchmarks despite its lower raw compute ceiling, while the Tesla M40, a Maxwell-based compute accelerator from 2015, counters with far larger memory capacity and bandwidth. The data shows a 24.3% lead for the A1000 Mobile in OpenCL and a narrower 4.9% margin in Vulkan, but the M40's 12 GB frame buffer and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth make it the better choice for memory-bound workloads that fit within its older feature set.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A1000 Mobile wins on compute efficiency and modern API support. Its OpenCL score of 48,703 beats the Tesla M40's 39,192 by 24.3%, and its Vulkan score of 46,782 edges out the M40's 44,602 by 4.9%. This translates to a clear advantage in applications that leverage current-generation rendering paths, ray tracing, or tensor operations. The A1000 Mobile's 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores are absent entirely from the M40, meaning any workload using DirectX 12 Ultimate features or AI acceleration will only run properly on the Ampere part.

The Tesla M40 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, it delivers 288.4 GB/s against the A1000 Mobile's 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus at 176.0 GB/s. For datasets that exceed 4 GB—large neural network inference batches, high-resolution texture atlases, or multi-GPU scientific simulations—the M40 can hold more data locally, avoiding PCIe transfers. Its pixel rate of 106.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 213.5 GTexel/s also dwarf the A1000 Mobile's 36.48 GPixel/s and 72.96 GTexel/s, so fill-rate-bound rasterization tasks favor the older card.

The benchmark data confirms this split. The A1000 Mobile's average benchmark score of 47,743 places it at the 85th percentile of all GPUs, while the M40's 41,897 sits at the 83rd percentile. The A1000 Mobile sits 1.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT in average score, while the M40 is 0.5% ahead of the Tesla M40 24 GB and 1.7% ahead of the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti—an indication that the M40 still holds its own in raw compute despite its age.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The RTX A1000 Mobile uses the GA107 chip on Samsung's 8 nm process, packing 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die for a density of 43.5 million transistors per mm². The Tesla M40 uses the GM200 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, with 8,000 million transistors spread across a massive 601 mm² die—a density of just 13.3 million per mm². The A1000 Mobile's newer node allows nearly 3.3 times the transistor density, which explains how it achieves competitive compute with far fewer resources.

The compute configurations differ significantly. The A1000 Mobile has 2,048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, plus 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores. The M40 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, but no RT or tensor cores. Despite having 50% more shading units and 3 times the TMUs and ROPs, the M40's FP32 throughput of 6.832 TFLOPS is only about 46% higher than the A1000 Mobile's 4.669 TFLOPS—the Maxwell architecture's lower per-clock efficiency and the A1000's higher boost clock ratio close much of the gap. The A1000 Mobile also supports FP16 at 4.669 TFLOPS (1:1), while the M40 has no FP16 capability listed at all.

Memory technology differs by two generations. The A1000 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 at 11 Gbps effective, while the M40 uses 12 GB of GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective. The M40's 384-bit bus gives it 63.8% more bandwidth despite the slower memory type. The A1000 Mobile's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface doubles the per-lane bandwidth of the M40's PCIe 3.0 x16, though the M40 has twice the lanes available. The M40 draws 250 W with an 8-pin EPS connector and needs a 600 W power supply, while the A1000 Mobile is an IGP part drawing 60 W with no power connectors.

The Verdict

Pick the RTX A1000 Mobile if you need modern features, efficiency, or any form of ray tracing or tensor acceleration. The benchmark data shows it leads in both OpenCL and Vulkan, and its 85th percentile ranking against all GPUs is two points higher than the M40's 83rd. The A1000 Mobile's 24.3% OpenCL advantage is substantial, and the 4.9% Vulkan lead, while smaller, still represents a consistent win. Its 60 W power draw makes it feasible for compact or mobile systems, and its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface supports faster data transfer on modern platforms.

Pick the Tesla M40 if your workload is memory-bound and fits within Maxwell's feature set. The 12 GB frame buffer is 3 times larger than the A1000 Mobile's 4 GB, and the 288.4 GB/s bandwidth is 63.8% higher. The M40's fill rates are roughly 3 times higher in both pixel and texture throughput. For scientific computing, large-batch inference, or any task that stores big working sets on the GPU, the M40's memory advantage can outweigh its compute deficit. Its 267 mm length and dual-slot design require a full-size chassis, and the 600 W PSU recommendation must be factored into the system design.

Neither card is current—both are end-of-life products. The A1000 Mobile was released on 2022-03-29, succeeding Quadro Turing-M and preceding Ada-MW. The Tesla M40 was released on 2015-11-09, following Tesla Kepler and leading to Tesla Pascal. If forced to choose one for general-purpose compute today, the A1000 Mobile's architectural advantages and benchmark wins make it the safer pick unless the M40's memory capacity is an absolute requirement.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better raw compute performance?

A: The Tesla M40 has higher peak FP32 throughput at 6.832 TFLOPS versus the RTX A1000 Mobile's 4.669 TFLOPS. However, the A1000 Mobile wins both benchmark tests, with a 24.3% lead in OpenCL and a 4.9% lead in Vulkan, indicating that real-world performance depends heavily on workload characteristics.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: No. The M40 lists no RT cores and no tensor cores, while the RTX A1000 Mobile includes 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores. Any workload requiring these features will only run on the A1000 Mobile.

Q: How much VRAM does each card have?

A: The Tesla M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, while the RTX A1000 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The M40 also has higher bandwidth at 288.4 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The RTX A1000 Mobile is rated at 60 W TDP with no power connectors, while the Tesla M40 is rated at 250 W with an 8-pin EPS connector and a 600 W suggested PSU. The A1000 Mobile delivers competitive benchmark scores at a fraction of the power draw.

Q: What API features differ between the two?

A: The A1000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M40 supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The A1000 Mobile's DirectX 12 Ultimate support enables features like ray tracing that the M40 cannot provide.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The A1000 Mobile's 47,743 average score is 1.5% below the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT and 2.2% above the AMD Radeon RX 6550M. The M40's 41,897 average is 0.5% above the Tesla M40 24 GB and 1.7% above the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, but 1.9% below the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL test is the biggest gap between these two cards. The RTX A1000 Mobile scores 48,703 against the Tesla M40's 39,192, a 24.3% delta. This is a decisive margin that reflects the A1000's modern architecture and driver optimization for OpenCL workloads. The M40's raw FP32 advantage of 6.832 TFLOPS versus 4.669 TFLOPS does not translate into OpenCL performance, likely due to the Maxwell architecture's older scheduling and lack of features like async compute that benefit modern OpenCL implementations.

The Vulkan test shows a much closer contest. The A1000 Mobile scores 46,782 against the M40's 44,602, a 4.9% margin. This narrower gap suggests that Vulkan's lower-level API allows the M40's larger shading unit count (3,072 versus 2,048) and higher fill rates to partially compensate for its architectural age. Still, the A1000 Mobile wins, and its support for Vulkan 1.4 alongside DirectX 12 Ultimate means it can handle newer Vulkan extensions that the M40 may not fully utilize.

In the broader benchmark context, the A1000 Mobile's 24.3% OpenCL win is larger than any of its nearest-rival deltas: it sits 1.5% behind the RX 6800 XT but 2.2% ahead of the RX 6550M. The M40's 4.9% Vulkan loss is smaller than its 1.9% deficit to the RX 7650 GRE. This suggests the A1000 Mobile is a more competitive part in its peer group than the M40 is in its own, even though the M40's rivals are themselves modern cards.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile | NVIDIA Tesla M40 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 28 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 8,000 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 601 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 13.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 630 MHz | 948 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1140 MHz | 1112 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB GDDR6 | 12 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 176.0 GB/s | 288.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 64 | 192 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 16 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 4.669 TFLOPS | 6.832 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 4.669 TFLOPS (1:1) | None |

| Pixel Rate | 36.48 GPixel/s | 106.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 72.96 GTexel/s | 213.5 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 60 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | None | 600 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

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

| Release Date | 2022-03-29 | 2015-11-09 |