NVIDIA RTX A5000 vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two shared benchmark tests between the NVIDIA Tesla M40 and the NVIDIA RTX A5000: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both cases, the RTX A5000 delivers a decisive victory, but the magnitude of the margin is what truly separates these two workstation-class accelerators.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Tesla M40 scores 39,192 points, while the RTX A5000 reaches 157,905 points. That represents a 75.2% advantage for the RTX A5000, meaning the Ampere-based card computes roughly four times faster in this general-purpose compute workload. The OpenCL test stresses raw parallel throughput across the entire GPU, and the gap here is substantial enough that the Tesla M40 cannot be considered competitive in any modern compute context that relies on this API.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though with a slightly smaller margin. The Tesla M40 posts 44,602 points, while the RTX A5000 scores 137,828 points. The RTX A5000 leads by 67.6% in this test, which measures graphics-oriented compute performance through the Vulkan API. While the percentage gap is a bit narrower than OpenCL, it still represents a more than threefold improvement in raw score.

It is importantly the Tesla M40 has no display outputs at all, so its Vulkan score is likely measured through a headless compute path. The RTX A5000, with four DisplayPort outputs, can drive displays and run Vulkan workloads in a more conventional graphics environment. Despite this difference in intended usage, the compute-focused Vulkan numbers still heavily favor the newer architecture.

Across both benchmarks, the RTX A5000 wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head comparisons. The Tesla M40 records zero victories. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests reinforces this hierarchy: the Tesla M40 averages 41,897 points, while the RTX A5000 averages 33,622 points. Interestingly, this aggregate figure is lower for the RTX A5000, but that is because its benchmark suite includes several Passmark DirectX tests with small scores (for example, 87 points in DirectX 12 and 153 points in DirectX 10), which drag down the arithmetic mean. The two shared tests are the fairest apples-to-apples comparison, and those unambiguously favor the RTX A5000.

When looking at the nearest rivals for each card, the Tesla M40 sits near the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, trailing it by 1.7% in average score, and ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 by 2.5%. The RTX A5000, by contrast, is grouped with much lower-end cards: it trails the GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB by 0.2%, the Radeon RX 7700S by 0.7%, and the Radeon HD 7950 by 1%. This suggests that the A5000's average benchmark score is dragged down by its diverse test set, and that the Geekbench results are the more meaningful indicator of its true compute capability.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A5000 is the superior product in every shared benchmark. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 157,905 versus 39,192 represents a 75.2% lead, and the Vulkan score of 137,828 versus 44,602 represents a 67.6% lead. For any workload that depends on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the RTX A5000 is the only rational choice between these two.

The Tesla M40, released in 2015, belongs to a different era of GPU design. Its Maxwell 2.0 architecture delivers 6.832 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 27.77 TFLOPS for the RTX A5000. The pixel rate of 106.8 GPixel/s versus 162.7 GPixel/s, and the texture rate of 213.5 GTexel/s versus 433.9 GTexel/s, both show the A5000 pulling further ahead in basic throughput metrics.

Who should pick the Tesla M40? The data suggests almost no one, unless the specific requirement is a legacy Maxwell-based compute card with no display output and a 2015 release date. Its 12 GB of GDDR5 memory and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth are dwarfed by the A5000's 24 GB of GDDR6 and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth. The M40's 83rd percentile ranking against all GPUs is actually higher than the A5000's 78th percentile, but that is a function of the benchmark suite composition, not real-world capability.

Who should pick the RTX A5000? Any user or organization running OpenCL or Vulkan compute workloads, or anyone needing a modern workstation card with four DisplayPort outputs. The A5000 delivers roughly four times the OpenCL throughput and over three times the Vulkan throughput, while also supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate, hardware ray tracing with 64 RT cores, and 256 tensor cores. The A5000 also draws less power (230 W versus 250 W) and requires a smaller suggested power supply (550 W versus 600 W), making it more efficient despite its vastly higher performance.

The verdict from the recorded data is clear: the RTX A5000 wins every head-to-head test, and the margin is large enough that the Tesla M40 should be considered obsolete for any modern compute task.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX A5000 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the Tesla M40?

A: The RTX A5000 scores 157,905 points versus 39,192 points for the Tesla M40, a 75.2% advantage in favor of the A5000.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 win any benchmark against the RTX A5000?

A: No. Across the two shared benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RTX A5000 wins both. The Tesla M40 records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The Tesla M40 has 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth with 12 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RTX A5000 has 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX A5000 delivers 27.77 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 6.832 TFLOPS for the Tesla M40.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: No. The Tesla M40 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RTX A5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The RTX A5000 has a 230 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 550 W, while the Tesla M40 has a 250 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 600 W.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The Tesla M40 uses a GM200 chip built on a 28 nm TSMC process, while the RTX A5000 uses a GA102 chip built on an 8 nm Samsung process. The transistor count jumps from 8,000 million to 28,300 million, and the die size grows from 601 mm² to 628 mm². Transistor density improves from 13.3M per mm² to 45.1M per mm².

Clock speeds are substantially higher on the RTX A5000. The base clock is 1170 MHz versus 948 MHz, and the boost clock is 1695 MHz versus 1112 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the M40 runs at 1502 MHz with 6 Gbps effective, while the A5000 runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity doubles from 12 GB to 24 GB, and the type changes from GDDR5 to GDDR6. The bus width remains 384 bit on both, but bandwidth increases from 288.4 GB/s to 768.0 GB/s.

Compute resources scale dramatically. Shading units go from 3072 to 8192, TMUs from 192 to 256, and ROPs stay at 96. The RTX A5000 adds 64 RT cores and 256 tensor cores, neither of which exists on the Tesla M40. Pixel rate rises from 106.8 GPixel/s to 162.7 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 213.5 GTexel/s to 433.9 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput increases from 6.832 TFLOPS to 27.77 TFLOPS, and the A5000 also offers FP16 at 27.77 TFLOPS, while the M40 has no recorded FP16 figure.

Power consumption actually decreases on the newer card: 230 W versus 250 W. The suggested PSU drops from 600 W to 550 W. The power connector changes from an 8-pin EPS to a single 8-pin. Both are dual-slot cards with identical 267 mm (10.5 inches) length, but the A5000 has a recorded height of 112 mm (4.4 inches) while the M40 has no height listed.

The bus interface advances from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs differ fundamentally: the Tesla M40 has no outputs, while the RTX A5000 has four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors. Release dates are April 2021 for the A5000 and November 2015 for the M40. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between Maxwell 2.0 and Ampere is the root cause of the performance disparity. The Tesla M40's Maxwell 2.0 architecture, released in 2015, was designed for compute workloads of that era. It uses a 28 nm process from TSMC and packs 8 billion transistors into a 601 mm² die. The RTX A5000's Ampere architecture, released in 2021, uses Samsung's 8 nm process and fits 28.3 billion transistors into a slightly larger 628 mm² die. The density increase from 13.3M to 45.1M transistors per mm² reflects six years of process and design advancement.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Tesla M40 has 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The RTX A5000 has 8192 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. More importantly, the A5000 introduces dedicated hardware that the M40 completely lacks: 64 RT cores for ray tracing and 256 tensor cores for AI acceleration. These features allow the A5000 to accelerate workloads that the M40 cannot handle at all in hardware.

Memory architecture also evolved. Both use a 384-bit bus, but the M40 pairs it with GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective, yielding 288.4 GB/s. The A5000 uses GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, more than doubling bandwidth to 768.0 GB/s. Capacity doubles from 12 GB to 24 GB, which is critical for large datasets and modern rendering workloads.

The feature set reflects the generational leap. The Tesla M40 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RTX A5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The A5000's DirectX 12 Ultimate support includes features like mesh shaders and variable-rate shading, which require the newer hardware. The M40 has no display outputs, making it a pure compute accelerator, while the A5000 includes four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs for direct display connectivity.

The power efficiency story is noteworthy. Despite having roughly four times the shading units and over four times the FP32 throughput, the A5000 consumes 20 W less power (230 W versus 250 W) and requires a 50 W smaller suggested PSU (550 W versus 600 W). This efficiency gain comes from the 8 nm process and the architectural improvements in Ampere. The Tesla M40's Maxwell design, while efficient for its time, cannot match the performance-per-watt of the newer architecture.

The production status for both is end-of-life, but their lineage points in different directions. The Tesla M40's predecessor was Tesla Kepler and its successor was Tesla Pascal, placing it in a compute-focused product line that has since evolved. The RTX A5000's predecessor was Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada, showing its position in the professional workstation graphics segment. These architectural differences explain why the RTX A5000 dominates the shared benchmarks so thoroughly.