NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A vs NVIDIA Tesla M40 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M40 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, yet their benchmark scores tell a surprisingly close story. The Tesla M40 is a dual-slot, 250 W compute card from the Maxwell era, while the MX570 A is a 25 W integrated-class mobile part built on Ampere. Despite this gulf in power and purpose, the data shows a 1-1 split in benchmark wins, with each card dominating in a different workload. The following analysis breaks down where each GPU wins, how their architectures differ, and what the benchmark results actually mean for a potential buyer.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark data reveals a clear split based on API and workload type. The Tesla M40 wins decisively in the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 44602 against the MX570 A’s 37601, a delta of 18.6% in favor of the older card. This is a substantial margin and indicates that the Tesla M40’s raw compute throughput, driven by its 3072 shading units and 96 ROPs, translates into superior performance in Vulkan-based applications. The Vulkan API tends to scale well with raw hardware resources, and the M40’s 384-bit memory bus and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth likely play a significant role here.

Conversely, the MX570 A wins the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 39780 against the M40’s 39192, a slim 1.5% margin. This is a much closer contest, but the win is notable because the MX570 A achieves it with far fewer resources: 2048 shading units, a 64-bit memory bus, and only 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The OpenCL result suggests that the MX570 A’s newer Ampere architecture, with its support for newer instruction sets and more efficient scheduling, can close the gap in workloads that are less memory-bandwidth-bound. The margin is small, but it flips the outcome compared to Vulkan.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the Tesla M40’s average benchmark score is 41897, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. The MX570 A averages 38691, sitting in the 81st percentile. These percentile rankings show that both cards are within a similar performance tier overall, despite the M40’s higher raw output. The M40’s nearest rivals include the Tesla M40 24 GB (0.5% higher), the RTX 3080 Ti (1.7% lower), and the RX 7650 GRE (1.9% lower), while the MX570 A sits near the Radeon Pro 580X (0% delta) and the RTX 5080 Mobile (0.9% higher). The data suggests that the M40 is a stronger compute-oriented card, while the MX570 A is a more balanced mobile part that wins in OpenCL but loses heavily in Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The Tesla M40 uses the GM200 chip, based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 8,000 million transistors into a 601 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.3 million per square millimeter. The MX570 A, in contrast, uses the GA107SB chip, based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. This density difference reflects the generational leap in manufacturing efficiency.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The M40 comes with 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX570 A has only 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. The M40’s memory bandwidth is three times higher, which explains its Vulkan dominance. However, the MX570 A uses faster GDDR6 memory with an effective speed of 12 Gbps, compared to the M40’s 6 Gbps effective GDDR5. The MX570 A also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the M40 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Feature support is another major divider. The MX570 A includes 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The M40 has neither, as Maxwell predates these features. The MX570 A also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M40 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The MX570 A’s FP16 performance is rated at 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1), while the M40 has no listed FP16 capability. Power consumption tells the story of their intended use: the M40 draws 250 W and requires an 8-pin EPS connector, while the MX570 A draws just 25 W with no power connectors needed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Vulkan test is the largest single win in the comparison. The Tesla M40 scores 44602, which is 18.6% higher than the MX570 A’s 37601. This is a decisive margin, and it aligns with the M40’s hardware profile. The M40’s 96 ROPs and 213.5 GTexel/s texture rate provide substantial fill-rate advantages, while its 288.4 GB/s bandwidth ensures that large data transfers do not bottleneck the GPU. The MX570 A, with only 32 ROPs and 73.92 GTexel/s, simply cannot keep pace in a Vulkan workload that likely stresses memory throughput and rasterization.

The OpenCL test is much closer, with the MX570 A edging out the M40 by 1.5%. The scores are 39780 versus 39192, a difference of just 588 points. This narrow win suggests that the MX570 A’s Ampere architecture, with its 2048 shading units and higher boost clock of 1155 MHz, is more efficient in OpenCL compute tasks. The M40’s boost clock is 1112 MHz, slightly lower, but it has 50% more shading units. The fact that the MX570 A wins despite having fewer units and a fraction of the memory bandwidth points to architectural efficiency gains in Ampere’s compute pipelines.

Beyond the head-to-head, the average benchmark scores provide context. The M40’s avgScore of 41897 is 8.3% higher than the MX570 A’s 38691. This aligns with the M40’s higher percentile rank (83 vs 81). The M40’s nearest rival, the Tesla M40 24 GB, scores 41707, only 0.5% lower, indicating that the 12 GB version is nearly identical in performance. The MX570 A’s closest rival is the Radeon Pro 580X, which scores 38706, a 0% delta, suggesting the two are statistically tied.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct use cases. The Tesla M40 is the stronger choice for Vulkan-based workloads and any application that benefits from high memory bandwidth and large framebuffers. Its 18.6% Vulkan lead over the MX570 A is significant, and its 12 GB of VRAM makes it suitable for large datasets or high-resolution textures. The M40’s 83rd percentile ranking and average score of 41897 place it ahead of the MX570 A overall. However, the M40 is a 250 W, dual-slot card with no display outputs, meaning it is strictly for compute or server use.

The MX570 A wins the OpenCL test, but the 1.5% margin is narrow. Its real advantages lie elsewhere: a 25 W power draw, integrated form factor, and support for RT cores and tensor cores. For a mobile or low-power system, the MX570 A is the only viable option, as the M40 cannot physically fit or be powered in such a context. The MX570 A also supports PCIe 4.0 and DirectX 12 Ultimate, making it more future-proof for gaming or AI-adjacent tasks. The data shows that the MX570 A is competitive in OpenCL despite its 64-bit memory bus, but it loses decisively in Vulkan.

Pick the Tesla M40 if you need raw compute throughput, especially for Vulkan-heavy applications, and have the power budget and physical space for a dual-slot card. Pick the MX570 A if you need a low-power, integrated solution with modern features like ray tracing and tensor cores, and can accept a significant Vulkan performance deficit. The benchmark results do not support the MX570 A as a general-purpose replacement for the M40, but they do show it is a capable OpenCL performer in its own right.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M40 has an average benchmark score of 41897, which is higher than the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A’s 38691. The M40 also ranks in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the MX570 A’s 81st percentile.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Tesla M40 scores 44602, which is 18.6% higher than the MX570 A’s 37601. This is the largest delta in either benchmark test.

Q: Does the MX570 A win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the MX570 A wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 39780, narrowly beating the Tesla M40’s 39192. The margin is only 1.5%.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The Tesla M40 has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same API levels?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. However, the MX570 A supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M40 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The MX570 A has a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter, which is significantly higher than the Tesla M40’s 13.3 million per square millimeter. The MX570 A is built on an 8 nm process, while the M40 uses 28 nm.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M40 | NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A |

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

| 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 | 1155 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 64 bit |

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

| Shading Units | 3072 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 192 | 64 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | None | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| FP32 Performance | 6.832 TFLOPS | 4.731 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None | 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 25 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 | 2021-12-16 |