Tesla K40m
VS
Radeon R9 260

Tesla K40m vs Radeon R9 260

NVIDIA

Tesla K40m

2013Core: 745 MHzBoost: 876 MHz
VS
AMD

Radeon R9 260

2013Core: 947 MHz

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Tesla K40m

#67
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1450
99%
#122
Tesla K20m
MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55
1410%
#137
Tesla K40m
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#139
Radeon Pro V520
MSRP: $800|Avg: $300
95%
#140
Quadro T1000 (móvel)
MSRP: $500|Avg: $120
95%
#141
Quadro M5500
MSRP: $800|Avg: $200
94%
#142
Quadro K1200
MSRP: $300|Avg: $184
94%
#143
Quadro P400
MSRP: $169|Avg: $60
94%
#144
Radeon Pro WX 7100
MSRP: $799|Avg: $180
92%
#145
Quadro M520
MSRP: $200|Avg: $50
91%
#146
Radeon Sky 500
MSRP: $500|Avg: $500
90%
#147
Quadro M5000
MSRP: $999|Avg: $120
90%
#148
Radeon Pro WX 4100
MSRP: $399|Avg: $85
88%
#149
Quadro P4000 (móvel)
MSRP: $819|Avg: $290
87%
#151
FirePro M40003
MSRP: $150|Avg: $72
87%
#152
Radeon Pro 465
MSRP: $500|Avg: $150
87%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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.

InsightTesla K40mRadeon 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

NVIDIA

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.

AMD

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).

FeatureTesla K40mRadeon 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)

FeatureTesla K40mRadeon 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.

FeatureTesla K40mRadeon 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.

FeatureTesla K40mRadeon 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