Tesla M40 24GB vs Quadro RTX 3000
Tesla M40 24GB
Popular choices:
Quadro RTX 3000
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. 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 M40 24GB
Performance Per Dollar Quadro RTX 3000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro RTX 3000 uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro RTX 3000 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Tesla M40 24GB lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro RTX 3000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Tesla M40 24GB offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Tesla M40 24GB offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $120 versus $891 for the Quadro RTX 3000, it costs 87% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 627.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+627.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($120) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($891) |
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 M40 24GB and Quadro RTX 3000
Tesla M40 24GB
The Tesla M40 24GB 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: 10,641 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla M40 24GB scores 10,641 and the Quadro RTX 3000 reaches 10,858 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla M40 24GB is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro RTX 3000 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 3,072 (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 4,608 (Quadro RTX 3000). Raw compute: 6.832 TFLOPS (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 16.31 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 3000). Boost clocks: 1112 MHz vs 1770 MHz.
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,641 | 10,858+2% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 3072 | 4608+50% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.832 TFLOPS | 16.31 TFLOPS+139% |
| Boost Clock | 1112 MHz | 1770 MHz+59% |
| ROPs | 96 | 96 |
| TMUs | 192 | 288+50% |
| L1 Cache | 1.1 MB | 4.5 MB+309% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 6 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Tesla M40 24GB comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro RTX 3000 has 6 GB. The Tesla M40 24GB offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 6 MB (Quadro RTX 3000) — the Quadro RTX 3000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+33% | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 6 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 12.1 (Quadro RTX 3000). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.0. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1+10% | 1.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (2x) (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 3000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Tesla M40 24GB) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 3000).
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4.0 (2x) | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla M40 24GB draws 250W versus the Quadro RTX 3000's 260W — a 3.9% difference. The Tesla M40 24GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 500W (Quadro RTX 3000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W-4% | 260W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 0mm |
| Height | 112mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 42.6+2% | 41.8 |
Value Analysis
The Tesla M40 24GB launched at $2000 MSRP and currently averages $120, while the Quadro RTX 3000 launched at $800 and now averages $891. The Tesla M40 24GB costs 86.5% less ($771 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 88.7 (Tesla M40 24GB) vs 12.2 (Quadro RTX 3000) — the Tesla M40 24GB offers 627% better value. The Quadro RTX 3000 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).
| Feature | Tesla M40 24GB | Quadro RTX 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2000 | $800-60% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $120-87% | $891 |
| Performance per Dollar | 88.7+627% | 12.2 |
| Codename | GM200 | TU102 |
| Release | November 10 2015 | August 13 2018 |
| Ranking | #253 | #78 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla M40 24GB and Quadro RTX 3000
