
RTX A1000
Popular choices:

Tesla M40 24GB
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
RTX A1000
2024Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,251 less on MSRP ($749 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 171.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 14.4 vs 5.3 G3D/$ ($749 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.
- ✅Measures 163mm instead of 267mm, a 104mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.
Tesla M40 24GB
2015Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌167% HIGHER MSRP$2,000 MSRPvs$749 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.3 vs 14.4 G3D/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $749 MSRP).
- ❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.
- ❌63.8% longer card at 267mm vs 163mm.
RTX A1000
2024Tesla M40 24GB
2015Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,251 less on MSRP ($749 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 171.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 14.4 vs 5.3 G3D/$ ($749 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.
- ✅Measures 163mm instead of 267mm, a 104mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌167% HIGHER MSRP$2,000 MSRPvs$749 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.3 vs 14.4 G3D/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $749 MSRP).
- ❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.
- ❌63.8% longer card at 267mm vs 163mm.
Quick Answers
So, is RTX A1000 better than Tesla M40 24GB?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Tesla M40 24GB still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 107 FPS | 151 FPS |
| medium | 90 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 76 FPS | 106 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 65 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 93 FPS | 121 FPS |
| medium | 77 FPS | 103 FPS |
| high | 56 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 47 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 37 FPS | 42 FPS |
| medium | 34 FPS | 38 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 24 FPS |
| ultra | 17 FPS | 20 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 120 FPS | 248 FPS |
| medium | 97 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 76 FPS | 163 FPS |
| ultra | 57 FPS | 128 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 88 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 68 FPS | 142 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 115 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 89 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 53 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 42 FPS | 78 FPS |
| high | 34 FPS | 65 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 49 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 487 FPS | 479 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 383 FPS |
| high | 324 FPS | 319 FPS |
| ultra | 243 FPS | 239 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 365 FPS | 359 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 287 FPS |
| high | 243 FPS | 239 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 180 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 243 FPS | 239 FPS |
| medium | 195 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 162 FPS | 160 FPS |
| ultra | 122 FPS | 120 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 243 FPS | 293 FPS |
| medium | 209 FPS | 252 FPS |
| high | 170 FPS | 210 FPS |
| ultra | 142 FPS | 163 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 182 FPS | 217 FPS |
| medium | 159 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 125 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 118 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 85 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 69 FPS | 80 FPS |
| ultra | 54 FPS | 61 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of RTX A1000 and Tesla M40 24GB

RTX A1000
RTX A1000
The RTX A1000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 16 2024. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 727 MHz to 1462 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 18 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,814 points.

Tesla M40 24GB
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.
Graphics Performance
The RTX A1000 scores 10,814 and the Tesla M40 24GB reaches 10,641 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The RTX A1000 is built on Ampere while the Tesla M40 24GB uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 8 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (RTX A1000) vs 3,072 (Tesla M40 24GB). Raw compute: 6.737 TFLOPS (RTX A1000) vs 6.832 TFLOPS (Tesla M40 24GB). Boost clocks: 1462 MHz vs 1112 MHz.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,814+2% | 10,641 |
| Architecture | Ampere | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304 | 3072+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.737 TFLOPS | 6.832 TFLOPS+1% |
| Boost Clock | 1462 MHz+31% | 1112 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 96+200% |
| TMUs | 72 | 192+167% |
| L1 Cache | 2.3 MB+109% | 1.1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 3 MB+50% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The RTX A1000 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Tesla M40 24GB relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 8 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (RTX A1000) vs 3 MB (Tesla M40 24GB) — the Tesla M40 24GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 3 MB+50% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (RTX A1000) vs 12.1 (Tesla M40 24GB). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (RTX A1000) vs NVENC 4.0 (2x) (Tesla M40 24GB). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A1000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Tesla M40 24GB).
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | NVENC 4.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The RTX A1000 draws 50W versus the Tesla M40 24GB's 250W — a 133.3% difference. The RTX A1000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (RTX A1000) vs 500W (Tesla M40 24GB). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 163mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-80% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 163mm | 267mm |
| Height | 69mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-12% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 216.3+408% | 42.6 |
Value Analysis
The RTX A1000 launched at $749 MSRP, while the Tesla M40 24GB launched at $2000. The RTX A1000 costs 62.5% less ($1251 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 14.4 (RTX A1000) vs 5.3 (Tesla M40 24GB) — the RTX A1000 offers 171.7% better value. The RTX A1000 is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2015).
| Feature | RTX A1000 | Tesla M40 24GB |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $749-63% | $2000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 14.4+172% | 5.3 |
| Codename | GA107 | GM200 |
| Release | April 16 2024 | November 10 2015 |
| Ranking | #251 | #253 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












