NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti Comparison

The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti are both Ampere-architecture parts, but they target divergent use cases. The A100 is a server accelerator with no display outputs, while the 3090 Ti is a consumer flagship with full display connectivity. The benchmark data shows a split decision: the A100 narrowly wins in OpenCL compute, while the 3090 Ti dominates in Vulkan graphics workloads. The following analysis breaks down these results, their architectural causes, and the practical implications for buyers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their head-to-head benchmark results exactly, with one win apiece. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB scores 178,627 against the RTX 3090 Ti’s 174,441, giving the A100 a 2.4% victory. This is a slim margin, but it is consistent with the A100’s positioning as a compute-first accelerator. The A100’s average benchmark score across all tests is 162,504, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival in the database is the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X, which scores 160,671, a 1.1% difference, and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation trails by 2.2% at 166,094.

The RTX 3090 Ti, by contrast, delivers a decisive win in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 215,633 versus the A100’s 146,380. That is a 32.1% advantage for the 3090 Ti, a massive gap that reflects the consumer card’s focus on real-time rendering and API-level optimization. The A100’s Vulkan score is notably below its own OpenCL score, indicating that its architecture is not tuned for graphics-oriented APIs. The 3090 Ti’s average benchmark score is 131,938, placing it in the 95th percentile, but its nearest rivals—such as the NVIDIA L4 at 131,072 (0.7% difference) and the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 at 135,396 (-2.6% difference)—show that its average is dragged down by the Vulkan result being its only high-scoring test. The A100’s average is higher because both available benchmarks are compute-oriented, but the head-to-head data reveals a clear specialization: compute leans A100, graphics leans 3090 Ti.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark, starting with the silicon itself. The A100 uses the GA100 chip built on a 7 nm TSMC process, containing 54,200 million transistors on a 826 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.6 million per mm². The RTX 3090 Ti uses the GA102 chip on Samsung’s 8 nm process, with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, for a density of 45.1 million per mm². The A100’s larger, denser die is designed for massive parallel compute throughput, while the 3090 Ti’s smaller die prioritizes higher clock speeds and graphics-specific hardware.

Clock speeds tell the rest of the story. The A100 has a base clock of 765 MHz and a boost clock of 1410 MHz, while the 3090 Ti runs at 1560 MHz base and 1860 MHz boost. The 3090 Ti’s higher clocks directly contribute to its superior Vulkan performance, but they come at a cost: a 450 W TDP versus the A100’s 250 W. The A100 compensates with a wider memory bus (5120-bit) and HBM2e memory, delivering 1.56 TB/s of bandwidth across 40 GB. The 3090 Ti uses a 384-bit bus with 24 GB of GDDR6X, achieving 1.01 TB/s. The A100’s bandwidth advantage is significant for memory-bound compute workloads, even though it has fewer shading units (6912 vs 10752) and a lower FP32 throughput (19.49 TFLOPS vs 40.00 TFLOPS).

Tensor core counts also differ: the A100 has 432 tensor cores, while the 3090 Ti has 336. The A100’s FP16 performance is listed as 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1 ratio), compared to the 3090 Ti’s 40.00 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). This indicates the A100 is optimized for mixed-precision AI training, where FP16 with reduced precision yields higher throughput. The 3090 Ti, however, includes 84 RT cores for ray tracing, which the A100 lacks entirely (null in the data). The A100 also has no display outputs, while the 3090 Ti offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, plus support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4—APIs the A100 does not list. Physically, the A100 is a dual-slot card at 267 mm length, while the 3090 Ti is a triple-slot card at 336 mm length, reflecting the latter’s need for more aggressive cooling.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of labor. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB is the choice for compute-centric environments where OpenCL performance and memory bandwidth matter most. Its 2.4% OpenCL lead over the 3090 Ti, combined with 1.56 TB/s of bandwidth and 40 GB of HBM2e, makes it suitable for large-scale data processing and AI inference, especially given its 97th percentile ranking and lower 250 W TDP. The lack of display outputs is irrelevant for server deployments. The RTX 3090 Ti, on the other hand, is the pick for graphics and rendering tasks. Its 32.1% Vulkan advantage is overwhelming, and its 40.00 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 84 RT cores, and full API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) make it a workstation-level rendering card. The 3090 Ti also has a launch MSRP of 1,999 USD, which can be stated once for reference.

For buyers, the decision hinges on workload. If the primary tasks are compute-oriented—such as scientific simulation or machine learning—the A100’s higher average benchmark score (162,504 vs 131,938) and 97th percentile standing make it the stronger candidate. If the tasks involve real-time graphics, ray tracing, or any Vulkan-based rendering, the 3090 Ti is unambiguously superior. The 3090 Ti’s higher TDP (450 W vs 250 W) and larger physical footprint (triple-slot, 336 mm) are trade-offs for its clock speed and feature set. Neither card is a generalist; each excels in its domain.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB has an average benchmark score of 162,504, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti averages 131,938. The A100 also ranks in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 3090 Ti’s 95th percentile.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 3090 Ti scores 215,633 versus the A100’s 146,380, giving the 3090 Ti a 32.1% advantage. This is the single largest head-to-head differential between the two cards.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The A100 has 40 GB of HBM2e memory on a 5120-bit bus with 1.56 TB/s bandwidth. The 3090 Ti has 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 1.01 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RTX 3090 Ti support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX 3090 Ti includes 84 RT cores. The A100 has no RT core count listed in the data.

Q: Which card has a higher power draw?

A: The RTX 3090 Ti has a TDP of 450 W, while the A100 has a TDP of 250 W. The 3090 Ti also requires a suggested 850 W PSU, compared to 600 W for the A100.

Q: Are there any display output differences?

A: The A100 has no display outputs, while the RTX 3090 Ti offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. This makes the 3090 Ti suitable for direct monitor connection, whereas the A100 is server-only.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB wins in compute-heavy scenarios. Its 2.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL (178,627 vs 174,441) is modest but consistent with its design goals. The 40 GB HBM2e memory and 1.56 TB/s bandwidth provide a substantial buffer for large datasets, and the 432 tensor cores with 77.97 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1) make it a strong candidate for AI training workloads. The 250 W TDP is notably lower than the 3090 Ti’s 450 W, which is a practical advantage in dense server environments. Its 97th percentile ranking and higher average score (162,504) suggest that in mixed compute tasks, the A100 is the more reliable performer.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti wins in graphics and rendering. The 32.1% Vulkan victory (215,633 vs 146,380) is the defining metric, indicating that the 3090 Ti’s higher base and boost clocks (1560 MHz / 1860 MHz) and 10752 shading units translate directly into faster real-time rendering. The 84 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature entirely absent from the A100. The 3090 Ti’s 40.00 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is more than double the A100’s 19.49 TFLOPS, making it the better choice for traditional rasterization and compute that relies on FP32. Its display outputs and full API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) mean it can serve as a workstation GPU for interactive design, whereas the A100 cannot drive a monitor at all. The 3090 Ti’s 95th percentile ranking is lower, but that is skewed by the Vulkan test being its only high score; in its niche, it is unmatched.