NVIDIA RTX A6000 vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB represent two distinct eras of professional computing, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the specific margins and the nature of the workloads reveal a more nuanced picture than a simple generational victory. This analysis relies strictly on the provided benchmark results and technical specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data available for both cards is limited to two tests, but the results are decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A6000 scores 193,937, while the Tesla M40 24 GB scores 37,439. This yields a delta of 418%, meaning the A6000 is over five times faster in this compute-oriented API. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap in raw throughput.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similarly lopsided result. The RTX A6000 achieves a score of 164,462, compared to the Tesla M40's 45,975. The delta here is 257.7%, indicating the A6000 is more than 3.5 times faster. While the absolute margin is smaller than in OpenCL, the A6000's dominance is unmistakable. The Tesla M40 24 GB secures zero wins in the available head-to-head comparisons.

These results align with the average benchmark scores for each card. The RTX A6000 has an average benchmark score of 44,075, placing it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals on average score include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti at 44,795 (a 1.6% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43,667 (a 0.9% delta). The Tesla M40 24 GB, by contrast, has an average score of 41,707, placing it in the 83rd percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti at 41,187 (a 1.3% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 at 40,870 (a 2% delta). The 84th and 83rd percentiles are adjacent, but the average score gap of 2,368 points is significant in absolute terms. The A6000's performance is closer to modern high-end consumer cards, while the M40 sits alongside older or lower-tier professional parts.

Architecture Differences

The performance disparity is rooted in fundamentally different architectures. The RTX A6000 is built on the Ampere architecture, specifically the GA102 chip, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This is a stark contrast to the Tesla M40 24 GB, which uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM200 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The manufacturing process alone explains a large part of the efficiency and performance gap.

The transistor counts tell a story of scale. The GA102 chip houses 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The GM200 chip, while physically large at 601 mm², contains only 8,000 million transistors, for a density of 13.3 million per mm². The A6000 packs over 3.5 times more transistors into a similar physical footprint, enabling its massive compute capabilities.

This architectural lead translates directly into core counts. The RTX A6000 features 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 112 raster operation pipelines (ROPs). It also includes 84 dedicated ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores, purpose-built for modern graphics and AI workloads. The Tesla M40 24 GB, from the pre-ray tracing era, offers 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor cores present. The A6000 has more than three times the shading units and nearly double the TMUs.

Memory subsystems also diverge significantly. The RTX A6000 is equipped with 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 768.0 GB/s. The Tesla M40 24 GB offers 24 GB of GDDR5 memory on the same 384-bit bus, but its bandwidth is limited to 288.4 GB/s. The A6000 has double the capacity and nearly 2.7 times the memory bandwidth. The clock speeds also favor the newer card, with the A6000 boosting to 1800 MHz compared to the M40's 1112 MHz boost clock.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: for any task that leverages the benchmarked APIs, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior choice. Its 418% lead in OpenCL and 257.7% lead in Vulkan demonstrate a massive compute advantage. The A6000's architecture is designed for the modern era of graphics and compute, featuring capabilities like ray tracing and tensor cores that the Tesla M40 24 GB simply does not possess.

The Tesla M40 24 GB, however, is not without its merits, though they are contextual. Its 83rd percentile ranking shows it remains a competent performer for certain legacy or less demanding workloads. Its 24 GB of memory is substantial, though the lower bandwidth and older GDDR5 technology limit its usefulness in memory-intensive modern applications. For a system requiring a dual-slot card with no display outputs for dedicated compute tasks that do not require the latest features, it could still serve a purpose. However, benchmark results indicate that the A6000 is the definitive winner for performance. The choice is clear: the RTX A6000 is the superior product by every measurable metric in this comparison. The Tesla M40 24 GB is a relic from a previous generation, and the data shows it is outclassed in every head-to-head benchmark.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specifications where the two cards differ, based solely on the provided data.

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A6000 | NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Ampere | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 8,000 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 601 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.1M / mm² | 13.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1410 MHz | 948 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1800 MHz | 1112 MHz |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 768.0 GB/s | 288.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 10752 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 336 | 192 |

| ROPs | 112 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 84 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 336 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 201.6 GPixel/s | 106.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 604.8 GTexel/s | 213.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 38.71 TFLOPS | 6.832 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 300 W | 250 W |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 600 W |

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

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

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

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX A6000 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX A6000 scores 193,937, which is 418% higher than the Tesla M40 24 GB's score of 37,439.

Q: Does the Tesla M40 24 GB support ray tracing?

A: No. The specification data lists null for RT Cores on the Tesla M40 24 GB, while the RTX A6000 has 84 RT cores.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX A6000 has a memory bandwidth of 768.0 GB/s, while the Tesla M40 24 GB has a bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX A6000 has a transistor density of 45.1M / mm², significantly higher than the Tesla M40 24 GB's 13.3M / mm².

Q: What is the FP32 performance of each card?

A: The RTX A6000 is rated at 38.71 TFLOPS, while the Tesla M40 24 GB is rated at 6.832 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards have the same power connector requirement?

A: Yes, both cards use an 8-pin EPS power connector, though their TDPs differ at 300 W for the A6000 and 250 W for the M40.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data and specifications, the use cases for each card are clearly delineated.

NVIDIA RTX A6000:

The A6000 wins in every single scenario that is measurable from the data. Its dominance in the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests makes it the definitive choice for any modern, compute-intensive professional workload. This includes tasks that benefit from its 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, such as real-time ray-traced rendering and AI inference. Its 48 GB of GDDR6 memory with 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth provides the capacity and speed needed for large datasets and complex simulations. The 1:1 FP16 performance of 38.71 TFLOPS is a clear advantage for workloads that can utilize reduced precision. The A6000's higher percentile ranking and average benchmark score confirm its position as a top-tier performer.

NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB:

The Tesla M40 24 GB has no benchmark wins in this comparison. Its potential use cases are defined by its limitations. It could be considered for legacy compute tasks that are not reliant on modern APIs or features like ray tracing. Its 24 GB of memory is ample for some large-memory compute tasks, but the lower bandwidth of 288.4 GB/s will be a bottleneck. As a card with no display outputs, it is strictly for compute servers where a dedicated GPU is needed for processing. Its lower TDP of 250 W means it requires a smaller 600 W power supply, which could be a factor in an older system with limited power headroom. However, the data suggests that for any task where performance is the priority, the RTX A6000 is the superior option. The Tesla M40's 83rd percentile ranking shows it is not obsolete, but it is clearly outclassed by the newer architecture.