DEPLOYDatabase

Chip comparison

NVIDIA L40S vs Tenstorrent Wormhole

Side-by-side specs

Straight from each vendor's datasheet. Winner in bold: higher throughput, memory, or transistor count; lower power draw or price. Sparse (2:4) throughput roughly doubles the FP8/INT8 numbers shown.

FieldNVIDIA L40STenstorrent Wormhole
Process nodeTSMC 4NGlobalFoundries 12nm
Transistors (B)76.3
TDP350 W160 W
Memory48 GB GDDR612 GB GDDR6
Memory bandwidth864 GB/s288 GB/s
FP16 (dense)362 TFLOPS148 TFLOPS
BF16 (dense)362 TFLOPS
FP8 (dense)733 TFLOPS
INT8 (dense)733 TOPS590 TOPS
Form factorPCIePCIe (n300, n150)
Announced2023-08-082024-07-01
Released2024-08-01

Robots running NVIDIA L40S

No robots publicly running it yet.

Robots running Tenstorrent Wormhole

No robots publicly running it yet.

Data centers with NVIDIA L40S

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Data centers with Tenstorrent Wormhole

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Common questions

NVIDIA L40S vs Tenstorrent Wormhole: which is faster for training?

NVIDIA L40S has 4.95x the dense FP16/BF16 throughput of the other (NVIDIA L40S: 733 TFLOPS; Tenstorrent Wormhole: 148 TFLOPS). Real-world training speed also depends on memory bandwidth, interconnect, and software stack: see the spec diff for those inputs.

NVIDIA L40S vs Tenstorrent Wormhole: which has more memory?

NVIDIA L40S carries more HBM (NVIDIA L40S: 48 GB GDDR6; Tenstorrent Wormhole: 12 GB GDDR6). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.

NVIDIA L40S vs Tenstorrent Wormhole: which is more power-efficient?

Dense FP16/BF16 TFLOPS per watt: NVIDIA L40S 2.09 (733 ÷ 350 W); Tenstorrent Wormhole 0.93 (148 ÷ 160 W). NVIDIA L40S wins at the die level; system-level efficiency also depends on cooling and interconnect.

See also: every chip comparison · NVIDIA L40S full page · Tenstorrent Wormhole full page.