Tesla K40m vs Quadro FX 3500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3500 and Tesla K40m, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX 3500
2006, $1,599
256 MB GDDR3, 80 Watt
0.64
Tesla K40m
2013, $7,699
12 GB GDDR5, 245 Watt
7.54
+1078%

K40m outperforms FX 3500 by a whopping 1078% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1269587
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.06
Power efficiency0.622.38
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameG71GK110B
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date22 May 2006 (20 years ago)22 November 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 $7,699

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

FX 3500 and Tesla K40m have a nearly equal value for money.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data2880
Core clock speed450 MHz745 MHz
Boost clock speedno data876 MHz
Number of transistors278 million7,080 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt245 Watt
Texture fill rate9.000210.2
Floating-point processing powerno data5.046 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs20240
L1 Cacheno data240 KB
L2 Cacheno data1536 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length173 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB12 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed660 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth42.24 GB/s288.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (11_1)
Shader Model3.05.1
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA-3.5

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FX 3500 0.64
Tesla K40m 7.54
+1078%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FX 3500 265
Samples: 211
Tesla K40m 3143
+1086%
Samples: 4

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.64 7.54
Recency 22 May 2006 22 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 12 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 245 Watt

FX 3500 has 206% lower power consumption.

Tesla K40m, on the other hand, has a 1078% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221% more advanced lithography process.

The Tesla K40m is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3500 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 9 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 21 votes

Rate Tesla K40m on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3500 or Tesla K40m, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.