Tesla P40 vs GeForce 840M

Place in the ranking	799	179
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	2.77
Power efficiency	5.94	8.79
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	GM108	GP102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)	13 September 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$5,699

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	3840
Core clock speed	1029 MHz	1303 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	1531 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	11,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	33 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	17.98	367.4
Floating-point processing power	0.8632 TFLOPS	11.76 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	96
TMUs	16	240

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	8-pin EPS

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 type	DDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1001 MHz	1808 MHz
Memory bandwidth	16.02 GB/s	347.1 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost	2.0	no data
Optimus	+	-
GameWorks	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	+	6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 840M 2.72

Tesla P40 30.46
+1020%

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.

GeForce 840M 1095

Tesla P40 12266
+1020%

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p	45 −1011%	500−550 +1011%
Full HD	18 −1011%	200−210 +1011%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

28.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −971%	150−160 +971%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Valorant	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Dota 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −1018%	190−200 +1018%
Fortnite	16−18 −963%	170−180 +963%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −971%	150−160 +971%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −1015%	290−300 +1015%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 −977%	140−150 +977%
Valorant	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
World of Tanks	46 −987%	500−550 +987%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Dota 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −1018%	190−200 +1018%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −971%	150−160 +971%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −1015%	290−300 +1015%
Valorant	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
World of Tanks	18−20 −1005%	210−220 +1005%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%
Valorant	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Dota 2	16−18 −963%	170−180 +963%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −967%	160−170 +967%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −967%	160−170 +967%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Dota 2	16−18 −963%	170−180 +963%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Fortnite	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Valorant	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%

This is how GeForce 840M and Tesla P40 compete in popular games:

Tesla P40 is 1011% faster in 900p
Tesla P40 is 1011% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.72	30.46
Recency	12 March 2014	13 September 2016
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	33 Watt	250 Watt

GeForce 840M has 657.6% lower power consumption.

Tesla P40, on the other hand, has a 1019.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Tesla P40 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 840M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 840M is a notebook card while Tesla P40 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.