NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The data draws a clear line between these two Ampere-generation NVIDIA parts. The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB is a server compute module built for massive parallel workloads, while the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile is a high-end laptop GPU designed for portable workstations. The A100 wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks decisively: 61.8% ahead in Geekbench OpenCL and 67.2% ahead in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 187147 against 113944 for the RTX A5500 Mobile, a gap that places the A100 in the 98th percentile of all GPUs versus the 94th percentile for the mobile part.

For buyers, the choice depends entirely on form factor and workload. If the system must be a laptop, the RTX A5500 Mobile is the only option, as the A100 SXM4 is a slot-based module with no display outputs and no power connectors, designed for server racks. If the system is a server or workstation with SXM support, the A100 is the overwhelming performance pick, though its 400 W TDP and 800 W suggested PSU requirement make it a data-center-class component. The RTX A5500 Mobile, with its 165 W TDP, fits into portable chassis but sacrifices more than a third of its performance potential relative to the A100 in both OpenCL and Vulkan tasks.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the Ampere architecture, but they are built on different processes and different chips. The A100 uses the GA100 die, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. The RTX A5500 Mobile uses the GA103 die, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The A100 is the larger chip by far: 54,200 million transistors on a 826 mm² die, with a transistor density of 65.6M per mm². The RTX A5500 Mobile packs 22,000 million transistors on a 496 mm² die, with a density of 44.4M per mm². That density difference reflects the more advanced 7 nm node and the server-oriented design of the A100.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The A100 carries 40 GB of HBM2e across a 5120-bit bus, delivering 1.56 TB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s. The A100's bandwidth advantage is 3x, which matters enormously for memory-bound compute workloads. The A100 also has 432 tensor cores versus 232 on the mobile part, and the A100 lists no RT cores while the RTX A5500 Mobile has 58. The A100's FP16 throughput is 77.97 TFLOPS using a 4:1 ratio, while the RTX A5500 Mobile achieves 22.27 TFLOPS at 1:1. In raw FP32, the mobile chip actually posts a higher figure: 22.27 TFLOPS versus 19.49 TFLOPS for the A100. The A100 compensates with higher pixel and texture rates: 225.6 GPixel/s and 609.1 GTexel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s and 348.0 GTexel/s.

Clock behavior also differs. The A100 has a lower boost clock at 1410 MHz versus 1500 MHz on the mobile part, but a higher base clock at 1095 MHz versus 975 MHz. The A100's memory runs at 1215 MHz with 2.4 Gbps effective, while the RTX A5500 Mobile's memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. The mobile part 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 compute-focused, no-display design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile posts 22.27 TFLOPS FP32, slightly ahead of the A100's 19.49 TFLOPS. However, the A100 dominates in FP16 with 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1) versus 22.27 TFLOPS (1:1).

Q: Why is the A100 so much faster in the recorded benchmarks despite lower FP32?

A: The A100 wins Geekbench OpenCL by 61.8% and Geekbench Vulkan by 67.2%. The likely factors are its 1.56 TB/s memory bandwidth, 432 tensor cores, and 5120-bit memory bus, all of which accelerate the mixed workloads these benchmarks exercise.

Q: Can the RTX A5500 Mobile be used as a desktop replacement GPU?

A: The database lists its display outputs as "Portable Device Dependent" and its power connectors as "None." It is designed for laptops, with a 165 W TDP and no suggested PSU rating. The A100, by contrast, has no display outputs at all and requires an 800 W suggested PSU.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life. The A100 was released on 2020-05-13 and the RTX A5500 Mobile on 2022-03-21. The A100's predecessor is Tesla Turing and its successor is Server Ada. The RTX A5500 Mobile's predecessor is Quadro Turing-M and its successor is Ada-MW.

Q: Which GPU has better Vulkan performance?

A: The A100 scores 173198 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 67.2% higher than the RTX A5500 Mobile's 103601. Note that the A100 lists no Vulkan API version in its specs, but its benchmark score indicates strong compute performance in that test.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The A100's average score of 187147 is 1.3% above the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation and 1.9% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB, while it trails the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB by 3.7%. The RTX A5500 Mobile's average of 113944 is 0.4% below the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB and 2.7% below the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, while it leads the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 by 2.9%.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification field. Process node: 7 nm TSMC for the A100 versus 8 nm Samsung for the RTX A5500 Mobile. Transistors: 54,200 million versus 22,000 million. Die size: 826 mm² versus 496 mm². Transistor density: 65.6M per mm² versus 44.4M per mm². Base clock: 1095 MHz versus 975 MHz. Boost clock: 1410 MHz versus 1500 MHz. Memory clock: 1215 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Memory size: 40 GB versus 16 GB. Memory type: HBM2e versus GDDR6. Bus width: 5120 bit versus 256 bit. Bandwidth: 1.56 TB/s versus 512.0 GB/s.

Compute resources diverge sharply. Shading units: 6912 for the A100 versus 7424 for the RTX A5500 Mobile. TMUs: 432 versus 232. ROPs: 160 versus 96. Tensor cores: 432 versus 232. RT cores: not listed for the A100 versus 58 for the mobile part. Pixel rate: 225.6 GPixel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 609.1 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s. FP32: 19.49 TFLOPS versus 22.27 TFLOPS. FP16: 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1) versus 22.27 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and form factor differ completely. TDP: 400 W for the A100 versus 165 W for the RTX A5500 Mobile. Slot width: SXM Module versus not listed. Suggested PSU: 800 W versus not listed. Display outputs: "No outputs" versus "Portable Device Dependent." API support: none listed for the A100 versus DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for the mobile part. Bus interface is identical at PCIe 4.0 x16, and both have no power connectors listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A100 scores 201096 against 124287 for the RTX A5500 Mobile, a 61.8% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the A100 scores 173198 against 103601, a 67.2% advantage. The A100 wins both tests, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head wins.

The OpenCL gap of 61.8% is substantial but smaller than the Vulkan gap, suggesting the A100's advantage grows in workloads that exercise the Vulkan API more heavily. The Vulkan test shows the A100 at 173198, which is 67.2% higher than the mobile part's 103601. Both results are consistent with the A100's 1.56 TB/s memory bandwidth and 432 tensor cores, which provide a massive throughput advantage over the RTX A5500 Mobile's 512.0 GB/s and 232 tensor cores.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The A100 averages 187147 across its benchmark suite, while the RTX A5500 Mobile averages 113944. That is a 64.2% difference in average score, roughly in line with the individual test deltas. The A100 also sits in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A5500 Mobile sits in the 94th percentile.

Rival comparisons provide additional context. The A100's average score places it 1.3% above the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation and 1.9% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB, but 3.7% below the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB. The RTX A5500 Mobile's average places it 0.4% below the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, 2.7% below the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, and 2.9% below the NVIDIA GB10, while it is 2.9% above the AMD Radeon PRO W7900.

Where Each One Wins

The A100 wins decisively in raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 1.56 TB/s bandwidth versus 512.0 GB/s makes it the clear choice for large data sets, AI training, scientific simulation, and any workload that saturates memory. Its 77.97 TFLOPS FP16 compute is more than 3.5x the mobile part's 22.27 TFLOPS, which matters for deep learning and mixed-precision workloads. The A100 also leads in pixel rate (225.6 GPixel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s) and texture rate (609.1 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s). Its 40 GB memory capacity is 2.5x the mobile part's 16 GB, reducing the need for memory swapping in large models or renders.

The RTX A5500 Mobile wins in portability and API coverage. It is the only one of the two that can fit in a laptop, with a 165 W TDP versus the A100's 400 W. It also offers display outputs (portable device dependent) and full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the A100 has no display outputs and no recorded API support. The mobile part also posts higher FP32 compute at 22.27 TFLOPS versus 19.49 TFLOPS, which gives it a narrow edge in pure FP32 workloads that do not benefit from tensor cores or memory bandwidth.

The use-case split is straightforward. Server racks, AI clusters, and data-center compute favor the A100 overwhelmingly. Mobile workstations, on-location rendering, and any environment requiring display output favor the RTX A5500 Mobile. The A100's 800 W suggested PSU and SXM form factor exclude it from desktop use, while the RTX A5500 Mobile's 16 GB memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth limit its ceiling for the largest compute tasks. For builders choosing between them, the decision is less about performance and more about whether the system is a server or a laptop.