GeForce GTX 970 vs Tesla M40 24 GB
Aggregated performance score
Tesla M40 24 GB outperforms GeForce GTX 970 by 9% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 185 | 199 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 60 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 32.73 | 23.14 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019) | Maxwell (2014−2018) |
| GPU code name | GM200 | GM204 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 10 November 2015 (8 years ago) | 19 September 2014 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $329 |
| Current price | $250 | $105 (0.3x MSRP) |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Tesla M40 24 GB has 41% better value for money than GTX 970.
Detailed Specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 3072 | 1664 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 1664 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 1050 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1112 MHz | 1178 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 8,000 million | 5,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 145 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 98 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 213.5 | 109 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 3,920 gflops |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | no data | 500 Watt |
| Supplementary power connectors | 8-pin EPS | 2x 6-pins |
| SLI options | no data | + |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 24 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6 GB/s | 7.0 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 224 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
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 | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 4 displays |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| G-SYNC support | no data | + |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Supported GPU Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | no data | + |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | no data | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | 2.0 |
| GameWorks | no data | + |
API Compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | 5.2 | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
Tesla M40 24 GB outperforms GeForce GTX 970 by 9% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
Tesla M40 24 GB outperforms GeForce GTX 970 by 9% in Passmark.
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:
| Full HD | 85−90
+3.7%
| 82
−3.7%
|
| 1440p | 55−60
+1.9%
| 54
−1.9%
|
| 4K | 40−45
+5.3%
| 38
−5.3%
|
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 27.06 | 24.92 |
| Recency | 10 November 2015 | 19 September 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 24 GB | 4 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 145 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Tesla M40 24 GB and GeForce GTX 970.
Be aware that Tesla M40 24 GB is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 970 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with Similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
