Tesla K40m vs GeForce 9800M GT SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9800M GT SLI with Tesla K40m, including specs and performance data.
K40m outperforms 9800M SLI by a whopping 302% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 947 | 573 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.05 |
| Power efficiency | 1.10 | 2.35 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | NB9E-GT2 | GK110B |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 15 July 2008 (17 years ago) | 22 November 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $7,699 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 192 | 2880 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 745 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 876 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 7,080 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 245 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 210.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 5.046 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 240 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 240 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 1536 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 288.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | 3.5 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−300%
|
40−45
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−264%
|
40−45
+264%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−295%
|
150−160
+295%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−285%
|
150−160
+285%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−281%
|
80−85
+281%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−300%
|
40−45
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−264%
|
40−45
+264%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−295%
|
150−160
+295%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−281%
|
80−85
+281%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−300%
|
40−45
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−264%
|
40−45
+264%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−295%
|
150−160
+295%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−285%
|
50−55
+285%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−295%
|
75−80
+295%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−285%
|
50−55
+285%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−293%
|
55−60
+293%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.86 | 7.48 |
| Recency | 15 July 2008 | 22 November 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 245 Watt |
9800M GT SLI has 88.5% lower power consumption.
Tesla K40m, on the other hand, has a 302.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.
The Tesla K40m is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800M GT SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 9800M GT SLI is a notebook graphics card while Tesla K40m is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
