NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB dominates the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal in every recorded test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A100 scores 178,627 against the TITAN X Pascal's 66,696, a delta of 167.8% in favor of the A100. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a near-tripling of raw compute throughput as measured by this workload. The Vulkan test tells a similar story, with the A100 posting 146,380 versus 77,499 for the TITAN X Pascal, a lead of 88.9%. Neither benchmark favors the older card.

The average benchmark score reinforces this gap. The A100 sits at 162,504, while the TITAN X Pascal averages 72,098. That places the A100 in the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the TITAN X Pascal sits in the 91st percentile. The percentile difference is modest, but the raw score gap is enormous, indicating that the A100 is competing in a different performance class altogether. The A100 wins both head-to-head matchups, giving it a 2-0 record; the TITAN X Pascal has no wins in this comparison.

Looking at the A100's nearest rivals provides context for its standing. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X averages 160,671, which is 1.1% behind the A100, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 scores 164,894, a 1.4% deficit. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 trails by 1.6% with an average of 165,217, and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation is 2.2% behind at 166,094. These are close margins, meaning the A100 is not the absolute fastest in its peer group, but it is competitive within a narrow band. By contrast, the TITAN X Pascal's nearest rivals cluster around its own score: the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 averages 72,379, just 0.4% ahead, and the AMD Radeon RX 6650M scores 71,768, 0.5% behind. The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is 1.7% ahead at 73,370, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE trails by 1.8% at 70,829. The TITAN X Pascal is not an outlier among its peers; it is squarely in the middle of that group.

What the head-to-head numbers reveal is a generational chasm. The A100's OpenCL advantage of 167.8% is more than double its Vulkan advantage of 88.9%, suggesting that the A100's architectural strengths are more pronounced in compute-oriented OpenCL workloads than in graphics-oriented Vulkan tasks. Still, even in Vulkan, the A100 is nearly twice as fast. The TITAN X Pascal, despite being a capable card in its own right, cannot close the gap in either test.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB is the superior performer in every benchmark recorded, making it the appropriate choice for workloads that prioritize raw compute throughput. Its average benchmark score of 162,504 is more than double the TITAN X Pascal's 72,098, and it wins both head-to-head tests with deltas of 167.8% and 88.9%. For any application that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan performance, the A100 is the definitive pick.

The TITAN X Pascal, however, is not without its merits when viewed through the lens of its own peer group. Its average score places it within 1.8% of its nearest rivals, meaning it is a solid mid-pack performer among GPUs of its generation. The A100, by comparison, is near the top of its class, but it does not lead it decisively: the closest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X, is only 1.1% behind, and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation is 2.2% behind. The A100's dominance over the TITAN X Pascal is not mirrored by a similar dominance over its own contemporaries.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the data, the A100 is for users who need maximum compute performance, as evidenced by its 97th percentile ranking and its massive lead in both benchmark tests. The TITAN X Pascal is for users who are operating within the performance envelope of its generation, where it holds its own against rivals like the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 and the AMD Radeon RX 6650M. The A100's 40 GB of memory and 1.56 TB/s bandwidth also make it suited for large datasets, though those figures are not directly benchmarked here. The TITAN X Pascal, with 12 GB and 480.4 GB/s, is a smaller-capacity alternative. If the workload fits within the TITAN X Pascal's memory and compute limits, it remains a viable option; otherwise, the A100 is the only choice that the recorded data supports.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB has an average benchmark score of 162,504, compared to the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal's 72,098.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards in a single test?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the A100 scores 178,627 against the TITAN X Pascal's 66,696, a delta of 167.8%.

Q: Does the TITAN X Pascal win any benchmark against the A100?

A: No, the TITAN X Pascal does not win either of the two recorded head-to-head tests. The A100 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: How does the A100 compare to its nearest rival in the database?

A: The A100's closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X, which averages 160,671, placing it 1.1% behind the A100.

Q: What is the A100's percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The A100 is in the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the TITAN X Pascal is in the 91st percentile.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the TITAN X Pascal comes close to the A100?

A: The closest margin is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the A100 leads by 88.9%. In OpenCL, the gap is 167.8%, so the TITAN X Pascal never comes close in either test.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially across nearly every specification category. The A100 is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the TITAN X Pascal uses a 16 nm process, also from TSMC. The A100's die size is 826 mm², compared to 471 mm² for the TITAN X Pascal. Transistor counts follow the same pattern: the A100 has 54,200 million transistors, versus 11,800 million for the TITAN X Pascal, yielding a transistor density of 65.6M per mm² for the A100 and 25.1M per mm² for the TITAN X Pascal.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The TITAN X Pascal has a higher base clock of 1417 MHz and a higher boost clock of 1531 MHz, while the A100 runs at 765 MHz base and 1410 MHz boost. Memory clocks are similar in frequency, with the A100 at 1215 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) and the TITAN X Pascal at 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective), but the memory types differ: the A100 uses HBM2e, while the TITAN X Pascal uses GDDR5X. Memory capacity is 40 GB for the A100 versus 12 GB for the TITAN X Pascal, with bus widths of 5120 bits and 384 bits, respectively. Bandwidth reflects this: 1.56 TB/s for the A100, 480.4 GB/s for the TITAN X Pascal.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The A100 has 6912 shading units, 432 TMUs, and 160 ROPs, while the TITAN X Pascal has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The A100 also includes 432 tensor cores; the TITAN X Pascal has none. Pixel rate is 225.6 GPixel/s for the A100 versus 147.0 GPixel/s for the TITAN X Pascal, and texture rate is 609.1 GTexel/s versus 342.9 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 19.49 TFLOPS for the A100 and 10.97 TFLOPS for the TITAN X Pascal. FP16 performance is starkly different: the A100 delivers 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1 ratio), while the TITAN X Pascal manages only 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio).

Both cards have a TDP of 250 W and a suggested PSU of 600 W, and both are dual-slot. Power connectors differ: the A100 uses an 8-pin EPS, while the TITAN X Pascal uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for the A100 and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the TITAN X Pascal. Display outputs are absent on the A100, but the TITAN X Pascal includes 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The A100 has no listed DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, while the TITAN X Pascal supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Dimensions are nearly identical in length (267 mm for both) and height (111 mm for the A100, 112 mm for the TITAN X Pascal), with the TITAN X Pascal also having a listed width of 40 mm.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The A100 is based on the GA100 chip and the Ampere architecture, belonging to the Server Ampere generation. The TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip and the Pascal architecture, from the GeForce 10 generation. The A100 is fabricated on a 7 nm process, allowing for 54,200 million transistors on an 826 mm² die. The TITAN X Pascal uses a 16 nm process, packing 11,800 million transistors into a 471 mm² die. This process advantage is a foundational difference, enabling the A100's higher transistor density of 65.6M per mm² versus 25.1M per mm².

The A100's memory subsystem is radically different. It uses HBM2e across a 5120-bit bus, delivering 1.56 TB/s of bandwidth and 40 GB of capacity. The TITAN X Pascal relies on GDDR5X over a 384-bit bus, providing 480.4 GB/s and 12 GB. The A100's memory architecture is designed for high-bandwidth compute workloads, while the TITAN X Pascal's GDDR5X is more typical of consumer graphics cards of its era.

Compute features also separate the two. The A100 includes 432 tensor cores, which are absent from the TITAN X Pascal. This is a defining architectural difference: tensor cores enable the A100's FP16 throughput of 77.97 TFLOPS, a figure that dwarfs the TITAN X Pascal's 171.5 GFLOPS. The A100's FP32 output of 19.49 TFLOPS is also nearly double the TITAN X Pascal's 10.97 TFLOPS. The A100's shading unit count of 6912 is nearly double the TITAN X Pascal's 3584, and its TMU and ROP counts are similarly elevated.

The A100 has no display outputs, reflecting its server-oriented design, while the TITAN X Pascal includes a full set of display connectors. The A100 also lacks listed API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, whereas the TITAN X Pascal supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 4.0 x16 on the A100 versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on the TITAN X Pascal, which affects data transfer rates between the GPU and the host system. Release dates underscore the generational gap: the A100 launched in 2020, while the TITAN X Pascal launched in 2016.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows that the A100 wins in every measured category, so the question of "where each one wins" is less about direct comparison and more about context. The A100's wins are decisive in both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, with deltas of 167.8% and 88.9%, respectively. Its average benchmark score of 162,504 places it in the 97th percentile, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database. The A100 is the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks that leverage its FP32 and FP16 capabilities, its 40 GB of HBM2e memory, and its tensor cores. The absence of display outputs on the A100 suggests it is intended for server or datacenter deployments where rendering to a screen is not required.

The TITAN X Pascal, despite losing both head-to-head tests, has its own niche. Its average score of 72,098 places it in the 91st percentile, which is still respectable. Among its nearest rivals, it is competitive: the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is 0.4% ahead, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is 0.5% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE is 1.8% behind. The TITAN X Pascal wins against some of these peers and loses to others, but the margins are small. For users whose workloads are compatible with its 12 GB of GDDR5X memory and its 10.97 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, the TITAN X Pascal remains a viable option, especially given its display outputs and support for DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

In practical terms, the A100 wins for anyone who needs maximum compute throughput, as evidenced by its near-168% lead in OpenCL and its 89% lead in Vulkan. The TITAN X Pascal wins for users who value its display connectivity and its compatibility with consumer graphics APIs, which the A100 lacks entirely. The TITAN X Pascal also holds an advantage in clock speed, with a higher base and boost clock, but that does not translate into benchmark wins. The recorded data supports the A100 as the performance leader in every test, while the TITAN X Pascal's strengths lie in its feature set rather than its raw scores.