
Tesla K40m vs Radeon R9 260

Tesla K40m
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 260
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The Tesla K40m is positioned at rank #137 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Tesla K40m
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla K40m is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 260.
| Insight | Tesla K40m | Radeon R9 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Tesla K40m remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
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 7800X3D 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Tesla K40m and Radeon R9 260

Tesla K40m
The Tesla K40m is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 22 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 745 MHz to 876 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 245W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,143 points. Launch price was $7,699.

Radeon R9 260
The Radeon R9 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,048 points. Launch price was $399.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla K40m scores 3,143 and the Radeon R9 260 reaches 3,048 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla K40m is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,880 (Tesla K40m) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 260). Raw compute: 5.046 TFLOPS (Tesla K40m) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 260).
| Feature | Tesla K40m | Radeon R9 260 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,143+3% | 3,048 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2880+13% | 2560 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.046 TFLOPS+4% | 4.849 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 240+50% | 160 |
| L1 Cache | 240 KB | 640 KB+167% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+50% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla K40m | Radeon R9 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Tesla K40m) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 260) — the Tesla K40m has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla K40m | Radeon R9 260 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+50% | 1 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla K40m draws 245W versus the Radeon R9 260's 275W — a 11.5% difference. The Tesla K40m is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla K40m) vs 450W (Radeon R9 260). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | Tesla K40m | Radeon R9 260 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 245W-11% | 275W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Perf/Watt | 12.8+15% | 11.1 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















