NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the performance split between the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The database contains a single head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL. The A100 PCIe 80 GB scores 207,124, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124,812. This gives the A100 a 65.9% advantage, and it wins the only recorded head-to-head test.

Q: How does each card rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The A100 PCIe 80 GB sits at the 99th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 207,124. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile, with an average score of 117,088, which combines its OpenCL and Vulkan results.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card in the database?

A: For the A100 PCIe 80 GB, the nearest rival is the NVIDIA RTX 6000D at 195,964 (5.7% slower), followed by the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB at 194,415 (6.5% slower). On the other side, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D scores 219,827 (5.8% faster) and the NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225,124 (8% faster). For the RTX 4000 SFF, the NVIDIA GB10 is nearly identical at 117,393 (0.3% faster), and the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is 1.6% faster at 118,976; the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395) and RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944) are 2.4% and 2.8% slower, respectively.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The A100 PCIe 80 GB uses 80 GB of HBM2e memory on a 5120-bit bus, yielding 1.94 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, yielding 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The A100 PCIe 80 GB has a TDP of 300 W and requires a single 8-pin EPS power connector, with a suggested power supply of 700 W. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W, requires no power connectors (it draws power from the slot), and has a suggested power supply of 250 W.

Q: Which card has active production status?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is listed as Active in production, with a release date of March 2023. The A100 PCIe 80 GB is marked End-of-life, with a release date of June 2021.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two cards into different roles. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB is the compute heavyweight: it wins the only head-to-head benchmark by a wide margin, holds a 99th percentile ranking, and offers massive memory bandwidth and capacity. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the compact workstation card: it draws only 70 W, requires no external power connectors, and includes display outputs, but it loses decisively in raw OpenCL compute.

For anyone prioritizing maximum compute throughput and memory capacity in a server context, the A100 PCIe 80 GB is the clear choice from the recorded data. It delivers 65.9% higher OpenCL performance than the RTX 4000 SFF and has four times the memory (80 GB vs 20 GB) with over six times the bandwidth (1.94 TB/s vs 280.0 GB/s). However, this comes at the cost of a 300 W TDP, dual-slot size, and no display outputs.

For workstation users who need a small, low-power card with display connectivity, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the practical option. It is a dual-slot card at just 168 mm length, consumes 70 W, requires no external power connector, and provides four mini-DisplayPort outputs. Its OpenCL score of 124,812 still places it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, which is respectable, but it is clearly not in the same compute class as the A100.

The verdict is not a contest of equals: the A100 wins on raw performance and memory, the RTX 4000 SFF wins on power efficiency and physical integration. The choice depends on whether the workload is server-side compute or desktop workstation rendering.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head test is Geekbench OpenCL. The A100 PCIe 80 GB scores 207,124, and the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124,812. The delta is 65.9% in favor of the A100, which means the A100 is roughly two-thirds faster in this compute test.

To put this in context, the A100's score places it above its nearest rival, the RTX 6000D (195,964), by 5.7%, and above the Tesla V100S (194,415) by 6.5%. It trails the PG506-232 (225,124) and the Radeon PRO W7900D (219,827) by 8% and 5.8%, respectively. The RTX 4000 SFF's score of 124,812 is essentially tied with its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GB10, which is just 0.3% faster at 117,393. It also sits close to the Radeon PRO W7700 (118,976, 1.6% faster), the Tesla V100 SXM2 (114,395, 2.4% slower), and the RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944, 2.8% slower).

The RTX 4000 SFF also has a Vulkan score of 109,364, which is lower than its OpenCL score, but the A100 has no recorded Vulkan result in the database. So the head-to-head comparison rests entirely on OpenCL, where the A100's lead is decisive.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply across nearly every specification field. The A100 uses an 80 GB HBM2e memory configuration with a 5120-bit bus and 1.94 TB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 4000 SFF uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory capacity is four times larger on the A100, and bandwidth is nearly seven times higher.

Compute resources also differ: the A100 has 6,912 shading units, 432 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 160 raster output units (ROPs), with 432 tensor cores. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 192 tensor cores and 48 ray tracing cores. The A100's pixel rate is 225.6 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s for the RTX 4000 SFF, and its texture rate is 609.1 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s.

In floating-point performance, the A100 achieves 19.49 TFLOPS FP32 and 77.97 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1 ratio), while the RTX 4000 SFF achieves 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 and 19.17 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The FP32 numbers are nearly identical, but the A100's FP16 throughput is four times higher. Clock speeds differ: the A100 has a base of 1065 MHz and boost of 1410 MHz, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a base of 720 MHz and boost of 1560 MHz.

Physical dimensions and power are major differentiators. The A100 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, with a TDP of 300 W, requiring an 8-pin EPS connector and a 700 W power supply. The RTX 4000 SFF is 168 mm long and 69 mm tall, with a TDP of 70 W, no power connector, and a 250 W power supply. The A100 has no display outputs, while the RTX 4000 SFF has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Architecture Differences

The A100 PCIe 80 GB is built on the GA100 chip using the Ampere architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 54,200 million transistors on a die size of 826 mm², giving a transistor density of 65.6 million per mm². Its generation is listed as "Server Ampere (Axx)" and it has no ray tracing cores, but includes 432 tensor cores.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is built on the AD104 chip using the Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 35,800 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². Its generation is listed as "Workstation Ada (x000A)" and it includes 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores.

The transistor density difference is notable: the RTX 4000 SFF packs nearly twice as many transistors per square millimeter (121.8M vs 65.6M per mm²) due to the smaller 5 nm node, though the A100 has more total transistors and a much larger die. The A100's memory clock is 1512 MHz with 3 Gbps effective, while the RTX 4000 SFF's memory clock is 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, reflecting the different memory technologies (HBM2e vs GDDR6).

The API support also differs: the RTX 4000 SFF supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the A100 lists no API support in the database, consistent with its server-oriented, display-less design.

Where Each One Wins

The A100 PCIe 80 GB wins in the only head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, by 65.9%. Its advantages extend to memory bandwidth (1.94 TB/s vs 280.0 GB/s), FP16 compute (77.97 TFLOPS vs 19.17 TFLOPS), and raw pixel/texture rates (225.6 GPixel/s and 609.1 GTexel/s vs 99.84 GPixel/s and 299.5 GTexel/s). It also has a higher 99th percentile ranking versus the RTX 4000 SFF's 95th percentile.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in power efficiency and physical attributes. Its TDP of 70 W is less than a quarter of the A100's 300 W, and it requires no external power connector, making it suitable for systems with a 250 W power supply. It is also much smaller: 168 mm length and 69 mm height versus the A100's 267 mm and 111 mm. The RTX 4000 SFF includes four mini-DisplayPort outputs, enabling direct display connectivity, which the A100 lacks entirely.

The RTX 4000 SFF also has a higher boost clock (1560 MHz vs 1410 MHz) and a higher memory clock (1750 MHz vs 1512 MHz), though these do not compensate for the memory bandwidth gap. Its transistor density is nearly double, reflecting a more advanced 5 nm process. The RTX 4000 SFF also offers ray tracing cores, which the A100 does not have, and supports modern graphics APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) where the A100 records no API support.

In practice, the A100 is the winner for compute-heavy server workloads that need massive memory capacity and bandwidth, while the RTX 4000 SFF is the winner for compact workstation builds requiring low power draw, physical flexibility, and display outputs. The recorded data does not show any benchmark where the RTX 4000 SFF outperforms the A100, but its advantages are qualitative and specification-based rather than performance-based.