NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation occupy opposite ends of the data-center and workstation spectrum, yet both are built for professional compute. The A100, an end-of-life server module from the Ampere generation, is a behemoth designed for massive parallel workloads, while the RTX 4000 SFF is an active, compact workstation card built on the newer Ada Lovelace architecture. Benchmark data from Geekbench shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the architectural and physical differences between these two cards suggest they are intended for entirely different deployment scenarios.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB scores 201,096, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124,812. This translates to a 61.1% advantage for the A100, a massive margin that underscores the server card's raw compute dominance. The gap narrows slightly in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the A100 scores 173,198 against the RTX 4000 SFF's 109,364, giving the A100 a 58.4% lead. In both tests, the A100 takes the win, giving it a 2-0 sweep in head-to-head competition.

Looking at the broader context, the A100's average benchmark score of 187,147 places it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it outperforms 98% of the hardware in the database. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, scores 194,415, which is actually 3.7% higher than the A100, making the V100S a stronger performer in this metric. Other close competitors include the RTX 5000 Ada Generation (184,664, 1.3% behind) and the A100 SXM4 80 GB (183,725, 1.9% behind). The RTX 4000 SFF, by contrast, has an average score of 117,088, placing it in the 95th percentile. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA GB10, which scores 117,393, edging out the RTX 4000 SFF by just 0.3%. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is 1.6% ahead, while the RTX 4000 SFF leads the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% and the RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8%.

The data indicates that the A100 is not just faster, but dramatically so in synthetic workloads. However, the RTX 4000 SFF's 95th percentile ranking shows it is still a high-performing card in its own right, especially when considering its compact size and power envelope. The 61.1% delta in OpenCL is the single largest gap between the two, suggesting that the A100's compute capabilities are significantly more robust for raw number-crunching tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The A100 SXM4 40 GB is the clear winner for compute-intensive, server-side applications. Its 61.1% advantage in OpenCL and 58.4% lead in Vulkan demonstrate that it is purpose-built for workloads where raw throughput is paramount. The data shows it sits at the 98th percentile of all GPUs, signaling that it is among the most powerful accelerators ever benchmarked. This makes it the logical choice for large-scale training, scientific simulation, or any task that demands maximum parallel processing power. The A100's performance is so dominant that its nearest rival, the V100S, is the only card in its immediate vicinity to outscore it, and even then by just 3.7%.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in every category related to physical deployment and efficiency. It is a dual-slot card measuring 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, making it suitable for small-form-factor workstations. It features four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, enabling direct display connectivity, something the A100 lacks entirely—the A100 has no display outputs. The RTX 4000 SFF also draws significantly less power, with a 70 W TDP compared to the A100's 400 W, and it requires only a 250 W suggested PSU versus the A100's 800 W. While the A100 is an SXM module with no power connectors, the RTX 4000 SFF is a standard PCIe card that plugs into a conventional slot. For a workstation user who needs GPU acceleration and display output in a compact chassis, the RTX 4000 SFF is the only viable option between the two.

In terms of software features, the RTX 4000 SFF supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the A100 has no listed API support for these consumer-oriented graphics standards. This makes the RTX 4000 SFF suitable for graphics-intensive tasks like 3D rendering or video editing, whereas the A100 is exclusively a compute accelerator.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The A100 uses the GA100 chip on a 7 nm TSMC process, featuring 54,200 million transistors on a die size of 826 mm². This results in a transistor density of 65.6 million per mm². The RTX 4000 SFF uses the AD104 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, packing 35,800 million transistors into a much smaller 294 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The A100's larger die and older process node explain its higher power draw, while the RTX 4000 SFF's denser, newer process allows for greater efficiency.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The A100 features 40 GB of HBM2e memory on a 5120-bit bus, delivering a staggering 1.56 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 280.0 GB/s. The A100's memory bandwidth is more than five times higher, which is critical for memory-bound compute workloads. The A100 also has more shading units (6,912 vs. 6,144), more TMUs (432 vs. 192), and more ROPs (160 vs. 64). It also has 432 tensor cores, whereas the RTX 4000 SFF has 192, along with 48 dedicated RT cores that the A100 lacks entirely.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The A100 has a base clock of 1095 MHz and a boost clock of 1410 MHz, while the RTX 4000 SFF runs at a lower 720 MHz base but a higher 1560 MHz boost. Despite the RTX 4000 SFF's higher boost clock, the A100's massive hardware resources give it superior raw throughput. In FP32 performance, the A100 delivers 19.49 TFLOPS, slightly ahead of the RTX 4000 SFF's 19.17 TFLOPS. However, in FP16, the A100 reaches 77.97 TFLOPS (with a 4:1 ratio), while the RTX 4000 SFF is capped at 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1), highlighting the A100's advantage for mixed-precision AI workloads. Pixel and texture rates also favor the A100, with 225.6 GPixel/s and 609.1 GTexel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s and 299.5 GTexel/s for the RTX 4000 SFF.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice is straightforward. The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB is the superior performer for pure compute, with a 61.1% lead in OpenCL and a 58.4% lead in Vulkan over the RTX 4000 SFF. It is in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, has over five times the memory bandwidth, and offers more than four times the FP16 throughput. Anyone needing maximum acceleration for server-side AI training or scientific computing should choose the A100, provided they have the infrastructure to support its 400 W TDP and SXM module form factor.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the right pick for workstation users who need GPU power in a small, efficient package. It is an active product with a 70 W TDP, requiring a modest 250 W PSU, and it fits into a dual-slot, 168 mm length footprint. Its four mini-DisplayPort outputs make it immediately useful for driving displays, and its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 opens the door to modern graphics workloads. While it trails the A100 by a wide margin in synthetic benchmarks, its 95th percentile standing means it is still a powerful card, and its efficiency and versatility make it the pragmatic choice for desktop acceleration. The A100 wins on raw power; the RTX 4000 SFF wins on practicality.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB has an average benchmark score of 187,147, placing it in the 98th percentile, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 117,088, placing it in the 95th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the A100 in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The A100 scores 173,198 in Vulkan, which is 58.4% higher than the RTX 4000 SFF's score of 109,364.

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

A: The A100 offers 1.56 TB/s of memory bandwidth with its HBM2e memory, while the RTX 4000 SFF provides 280.0 GB/s with GDDR6 memory, making the A100's bandwidth over five times greater.

Q: Does the RTX 4000 SFF support display outputs?

A: Yes, the RTX 4000 SFF has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the A100 has no display outputs at all.

Q: What is the TDP and suggested PSU for each card?

A: The A100 has a 400 W TDP and requires an 800 W suggested PSU, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a 70 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more tensor cores?

A: The A100 has 432 tensor cores, while the RTX 4000 SFF has 192 tensor cores. The RTX 4000 SFF also has 48 RT cores, which the A100 does not have.