
Quadro RTX 3000
Popular choices:

Tesla M40
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
Quadro RTX 3000
2018Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,700 less on MSRP ($800 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 232% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 13.6 vs 4.1 G3D/$ ($800 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Tesla M40: it remains the more sensible modern option while Tesla M40 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Tesla M40
2015Why buy it
- ✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 6 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌212.5% HIGHER MSRP$2,500 MSRPvs$800 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 4.1 vs 13.6 G3D/$ ($2,500 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
Quadro RTX 3000
2018Tesla M40
2015Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,700 less on MSRP ($800 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 232% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 13.6 vs 4.1 G3D/$ ($800 MSRP vs $2,500 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Tesla M40: it remains the more sensible modern option while Tesla M40 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
Why buy it
- ✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 6 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 6 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 6 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Trade-offs
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌212.5% HIGHER MSRP$2,500 MSRPvs$800 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 4.1 vs 13.6 G3D/$ ($2,500 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is Quadro RTX 3000 better than Tesla M40?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Tesla M40 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 123 FPS | 151 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 98 FPS | 106 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 65 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 106 FPS | 121 FPS |
| medium | 91 FPS | 103 FPS |
| high | 77 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 68 FPS | 47 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 56 FPS | 42 FPS |
| medium | 50 FPS | 38 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 24 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 20 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 248 FPS |
| medium | 391 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 317 FPS | 163 FPS |
| ultra | 244 FPS | 128 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 296 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 244 FPS | 142 FPS |
| high | 211 FPS | 115 FPS |
| ultra | 173 FPS | 89 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 126 FPS | 78 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 65 FPS |
| ultra | 86 FPS | 49 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 489 FPS | 460 FPS |
| medium | 391 FPS | 368 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 307 FPS |
| ultra | 244 FPS | 230 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 366 FPS | 345 FPS |
| medium | 293 FPS | 276 FPS |
| high | 244 FPS | 230 FPS |
| ultra | 183 FPS | 172 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 244 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 195 FPS | 184 FPS |
| high | 163 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 122 FPS | 115 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 489 FPS | 293 FPS |
| medium | 391 FPS | 252 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 210 FPS |
| ultra | 244 FPS | 163 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 366 FPS | 217 FPS |
| medium | 293 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 244 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 183 FPS | 118 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 244 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 195 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 163 FPS | 80 FPS |
| ultra | 122 FPS | 61 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro RTX 3000 and Tesla M40

Quadro RTX 3000
Quadro RTX 3000
The Quadro RTX 3000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 13 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1770 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 260W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 72 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,858 points. Launch price was $9,999.

Tesla M40
Tesla M40
The Tesla M40 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 10 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 948 MHz to 1112 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,220 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Quadro RTX 3000 scores 10,858 versus the Tesla M40's 10,220 — the Quadro RTX 3000 leads by 6.2%. The Quadro RTX 3000 is built on Turing while the Tesla M40 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 4,608 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 3,072 (Tesla M40). Raw compute: 16.31 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 6.832 TFLOPS (Tesla M40). Boost clocks: 1770 MHz vs 1112 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,858+6% | 10,220 |
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 4608+50% | 3072 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 16.31 TFLOPS+139% | 6.832 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1770 MHz+59% | 1112 MHz |
| ROPs | 96 | 96 |
| TMUs | 288+50% | 192 |
| L1 Cache | 4.5 MB+309% | 1.1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+100% | 3 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The Quadro RTX 3000 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Tesla M40 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2 Super Resolution | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro RTX 3000 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla M40 has 8 GB. The Tesla M40 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 6 MB (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 3 MB (Tesla M40) — the Quadro RTX 3000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB | 8 GB+33% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+100% | 3 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 12.0 (Tesla M40). Vulkan: 1.0 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.0 | 1.1+10% |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 3000) vs NVENC 2.0 (2x) (Tesla M40). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Tesla M40).
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | NVENC 2.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro RTX 3000 draws 260W versus the Tesla M40's 250W — a 3.9% difference. The Tesla M40 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 500W (Tesla M40). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 260W | 250W-4% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 267mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 41.8+2% | 40.9 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro RTX 3000 launched at $800 MSRP, while the Tesla M40 launched at $2500. The Quadro RTX 3000 costs 68% less ($1700 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 13.6 (Quadro RTX 3000) vs 4.1 (Tesla M40) — the Quadro RTX 3000 offers 231.7% better value. The Quadro RTX 3000 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).
| Feature | Quadro RTX 3000 | Tesla M40 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $800-68% | $2500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 13.6+232% | 4.1 |
| Codename | TU102 | GM200 |
| Release | August 13 2018 | November 10 2015 |
| Ranking | #78 | #256 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












