NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

# NVIDIA Tesla M40 vs NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 and NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile are two very different GPUs that land surprisingly close in overall benchmark averages, yet they achieve their scores through entirely different strengths. The Tesla M40, a 2015-era dual-slot server card built on Maxwell 2.0, wins the Vulkan contest by a commanding 17.8% margin, while the RTX A500 Mobile, a 2022 Ampere laptop chip, counters with a 5% lead in OpenCL. The data shows a split decision: the M40 dominates in raw graphics throughput and memory bandwidth, while the A500 Mobile brings modern features, far better efficiency, and competitive compute performance in a fraction of the power envelope. The average benchmark scores tell the story—the M40 sits at 41,897 versus the A500 Mobile's 39,568—a gap of roughly 5.6% that barely separates them.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla M40 wins where memory bandwidth and raw pixel-pushing matter. Its 384-bit memory bus delivers 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, a figure that dwarfs the A500 Mobile's 96.00 GB/s. This explains the Vulkan result: the M40 scores 44,602 against the A500 Mobile's 37,873, a 17.8% advantage. The M40 also holds a massive lead in texture rate at 213.5 GTexel/s versus 98.37 GTexel/s, and pixel rate of 106.8 GPixel/s versus 49.18 GPixel/s. For workloads that hammer memory and texture units—large framebuffers, high-resolution rendering, or data-intensive compute—the M40's architecture is simply better equipped.

The RTX A500 Mobile wins where modern instruction sets and efficiency matter. Its OpenCL score of 41,263 beats the M40's 39,192 by 5%. This edge comes despite the A500 Mobile having fewer shading units (2,048 versus 3,072) and lower FP32 throughput (6.296 TFLOPS versus 6.832 TFLOPS). The A500 Mobile compensates with Ampere's architectural improvements, including 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores—features the M40 lacks entirely. Additionally, the A500 Mobile supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (6.296 TFLOPS), whereas the M40 has no FP16 capability listed. The A500 Mobile also runs on PCIe 4.0 x8 versus the M40's PCIe 3.0 x16, and its 30 W TDP makes it viable for portable systems, while the M40 demands a 600 W suggested PSU and an 8-pin EPS connector.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split is generation and process. The Tesla M40 uses the GM200 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, packing 8,000 million transistors into a 601 mm² die. The RTX A500 Mobile uses the GA107S chip on Samsung's 8 nm process, with 8,700 million transistors in just 200 mm². This is a dramatic density shift: the M40 achieves 13.3M transistors per mm², while the A500 Mobile reaches 43.5M per mm²—more than triple the density. The M40 is Maxwell 2.0 architecture; the A500 Mobile is Ampere. The M40 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the A500 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), including ray tracing and mesh shaders. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus at 6 Gbps effective, yielding 288.4 GB/s. The A500 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 12 Gbps effective, yielding only 96.00 GB/s. The M40's memory clock is 1502 MHz; the A500 Mobile's is 1500 MHz, but the bus width difference is decisive. Core clocks also differ: the M40 runs at 948 MHz base and 1112 MHz boost, while the A500 Mobile runs at 832 MHz base but boosts to 1537 MHz. The higher boost clock on the A500 Mobile partially compensates for its smaller core count.

Features unique to the A500 Mobile include 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores, enabling hardware ray tracing and AI acceleration—capabilities absent from the M40. The A500 Mobile's display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it relies on the host laptop's display pipeline, while the M40 has no outputs at all, being a compute/server card. The M40 is dual-slot with a 267 mm length; the A500 Mobile is an IGP (integrated GPU) with no dimensions listed. The M40 uses an 8-pin EPS power connector; the A500 Mobile uses none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Vulkan test delivers the largest swing. The M40 scores 44,602 against the A500 Mobile's 37,873—a 17.8% lead for the older card. This result aligns with the M40's superior memory bandwidth and texture throughput. Vulkan workloads often stress memory subsystem efficiency, and the M40's 384-bit bus provides nearly triple the bandwidth of the A500 Mobile's 64-bit bus. The M40's higher pixel rate (106.8 GPixel/s) and texture rate (213.5 GTexel/s) reinforce this pattern.

The Geekbench OpenCL test flips the result. The A500 Mobile scores 41,263 against the M40's 39,192—a 5% lead for the laptop chip. This is notable because the M40 has more shading units (3,072 vs. 2,048) and higher FP32 (6.832 vs. 6.296 TFLOPS). The A500 Mobile's win suggests its Ampere architecture executes compute workloads more efficiently per shader, and its tensor cores may assist in certain OpenCL operations. The A500 Mobile's higher boost clock (1537 MHz vs. 1112 MHz) also narrows the raw throughput gap.

Comparing to their respective nearest rivals adds context. The M40's average score of 41,897 places it 0.5% ahead of the Tesla M40 24 GB (41,707), 1.7% ahead of the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41,187), and 2.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40,870), but 1.9% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE (42,723). The A500 Mobile's average of 39,568 is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39,555, 0% delta), 1.2% ahead of the Radeon Pro 575X (39,116), but 1.2% behind the Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063) and 1.9% behind the Radeon Pro 580 (40,318). The M40's 83rd percentile versus the A500 Mobile's 82nd percentile confirms their near-equal standing across all GPUs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload. Choose the NVIDIA Tesla M40 if your priority is raw graphics throughput, Vulkan performance, or massive memory capacity. Its 12 GB of VRAM and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets or high-resolution textures, and its 17.8% Vulkan advantage is decisive. The M40 also holds a small edge in average benchmark score (41,897 vs. 39,568) and sits at the 83rd percentile versus the A500 Mobile's 82nd. However, the M40 is end-of-life, requires a 600 W PSU, has no display outputs, and lacks any ray tracing or tensor core capability.

Choose the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile if you need modern features, efficiency, or portability. Its 5% OpenCL lead, 30 W TDP, and inclusion of RT and tensor cores make it the more versatile chip for contemporary software that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate, FP16 compute, or AI acceleration. The A500 Mobile's 4 GB memory is a limitation, but its 8 nm process and 43.5M transistors per mm² density mean it delivers comparable compute in a fraction of the power envelope. For laptop integration or any system where power and space are constrained, the A500 Mobile is the only viable choice.

For pure performance per watt, the A500 Mobile is the clear winner: 6.296 TFLOPS at 30 W versus 6.832 TFLOPS at 250 W. But for pure performance per dollar of memory bandwidth, the M40 wins outright. There is no universal victor here—the benchmark results indicate two different tools for two different jobs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M40, with an average score of 41,897 compared to the RTX A500 Mobile's 39,568—a 5.6% difference.

Q: How big is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The Tesla M40 leads by 17.8% in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 44,602 versus the RTX A500 Mobile's 37,873.

Q: Does the RTX A500 Mobile support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 16 RT cores, while the Tesla M40 has no RT cores listed.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Tesla M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5, while the RTX A500 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 throughput?

A: The Tesla M40, at 6.832 TFLOPS, versus the RTX A500 Mobile's 6.296 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the power draw comparison?

A: The Tesla M40 has a 250 W TDP, while the RTX A500 Mobile has a 30 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M40 | NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile |

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

| Chip | GM200 | GA107S |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

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

| Die Size | 601 mm² | 200 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 948 MHz | 832 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1112 MHz | 1537 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1502 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 192 | 64 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | None | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 106.8 GPixel/s | 49.18 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 213.5 GTexel/s | 98.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 6.832 TFLOPS | 6.296 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | None | 6.296 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 8-pin EPS | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | None |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Release Date | 2015-11-09 | 2022-03-21 |

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