NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two NVIDIA offerings. Across the two benchmark tests captured in the database, the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB wins both, with winsA recorded at 2 and winsB at 0. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the A100 scoring 201,096 against the TITAN X Pascal's 66,696, a delta of 201.5% in favor of the A100. This is not a marginal improvement; it represents a threefold advantage in raw compute throughput as measured by this workload.

The Vulkan results follow a similar trajectory, though the margin narrows somewhat. The A100 posts 173,198 while the TITAN X Pascal manages 77,499, producing a delta of 123.5%. Even at its smallest advantage, the A100 more than doubles the TITAN X Pascal's output. The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy: the A100 sits at 187,147, placing it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the TITAN X Pascal averages 72,098, good for the 91st percentile. Both are high performers relative to the broader field, but the distance between them is substantial.

Looking at the A100's nearest rivals provides context for just how strong its position is. It leads the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation by 1.3%, the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB by 1.9%, and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell by 2.8%. The only nearby competitor that exceeds it is the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, which sits 3.7% higher. These are tight margins, indicating that the A100 40 GB is not merely fast, it is operating at the very top of the database's performance distribution. The TITAN X Pascal, by contrast, trades places with AMD parts: it is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M, 1.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, and 1.7% behind the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. The Pascal card is competitive within its peer group, but that group sits far below the A100's tier.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras and manufacturing processes. The A100 is built on the Ampere architecture with a GA100 chip, fabricated at TSMC on a 7 nm process. The TITAN X Pascal uses the Pascal architecture with a GP102 chip, also from TSMC but on a 16 nm node. The process shrink is significant: transistor density on the A100 reaches 65.6 million per square millimeter, versus 25.1 million per square millimeter on the TITAN X Pascal. The A100 packs 54,200 million transistors onto an 826 mm² die, while the TITAN X Pascal contains 11,800 million transistors across a 471 mm² die.

Memory configuration differs sharply. The A100 carries 40 GB of HBM2e across a 5120-bit bus, delivering 1.56 TB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal has 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, with 480.4 GB/s. The A100's memory bandwidth is more than three times higher, which matters for data-intensive workloads. Clock behavior also diverges: the TITAN X Pascal runs a higher base clock at 1417 MHz and boosts to 1531 MHz, while the A100 starts at 1095 MHz and boosts to 1410 MHz. The A100 compensates with far more execution resources. Its 6912 shading units, 432 TMUs, and 160 ROPs dwarf the TITAN X Pascal's 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs.

Compute throughput tells the same story. The A100 delivers 19.49 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 77.97 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 4:1 ratio. The TITAN X Pascal manages 10.97 TFLOPS of FP32 but only 171.5 GFLOPS of FP16, at a 1:64 ratio. The A100 also includes 432 tensor cores, which the TITAN X Pascal lacks entirely. Pixel and texture rates follow: the A100 reaches 225.6 GPixel/s and 609.1 GTexel/s, while the TITAN X Pascal posts 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s. The A100 is built on the "Server Ampere (Axx)" generation, while the TITAN X Pascal belongs to the GeForce 10 generation. The A100's predecessor is Tesla Turing, and its successor is Server Ada; the TITAN X Pascal follows GeForce 900 and precedes GeForce 20.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the A100 a clean sweep, but the nature of the workloads matters. The A100's OpenCL advantage of 201.5% over the TITAN X Pascal points to compute-heavy applications, where its larger memory pool, wider bus, tensor cores, and higher FP32 and FP16 throughput come into play. The 40 GB HBM2e configuration and 1.56 TB/s bandwidth make it suited to large datasets that would exceed the TITAN X Pascal's 12 GB GDDR5X frame buffer. For tasks that involve dense matrix math, the 432 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware that the TITAN X Pascal cannot emulate.

The Vulkan result, while still won by the A100 at 123.5%, closes the gap somewhat. This suggests the TITAN X Pascal is less disadvantaged in graphics-oriented or API-driven tasks, where its 12 (12_1) DirectX support, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 APIs are fully specified. The A100 lists no API support in the database and has no display outputs, while the TITAN X Pascal includes 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The TITAN X Pascal is also a dual-slot card with a 267 mm length, 112 mm height, and 40 mm width, whereas the A100 is an SXM module with no display outputs and no power connectors listed. For any workload requiring direct display output, the TITAN X Pascal is the only option of the two. For pure compute throughput, the A100's advantages are consistent across both recorded benchmarks.

The TITAN X Pascal's 250 W TDP against the A100's 400 W TDP, and its suggested PSU of 600 W versus 800 W, indicate a lower power envelope, though the database records no efficiency metrics. The Pascal card's higher clocks per shading unit, 1417 MHz base versus 1095 MHz, suggest it may be more responsive in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive scenarios, but the recorded benchmarks do not capture such a scenario. Based strictly on the data, the A100 wins both recorded tests, and the TITAN X Pascal's only clear advantages lie in its display outputs, its specified API coverage, and its smaller physical footprint.

The Verdict

The data directs different buyers to different cards. The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB is the clear choice for anyone whose priority is raw compute performance in the styles of workloads captured by Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests. It wins both head-to-head tests, sits in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, and edges out several modern Ada and Blackwell generation cards by margins between 1.3% and 2.8%. Its 40 GB memory, 1.96 TB/s bandwidth, 432 tensor cores, and 77.97 TFLOPS of FP16 compute mark it as a server-grade part aimed at sustained, heavy computation. Released on 2020-05-13, it is now end-of-life, but its performance data still places it among the fastest GPUs in the database.

The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal suits a different set of requirements. It is the only one of the two with display outputs, offering 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, along with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Its 12 GB GDDR5X memory and 10.97 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while far behind the A100, still place it in the 91st percentile, and its nearest rivals are AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, Radeon RX 6650M, Radeon RX 6600 LE, and Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, all within a 1.8% band. It is a dual-slot card with a 267 mm length and requires a 600 W PSU, making it far more adaptable to conventional desktop systems. Buyers who need a GPU with video outputs and a standard card form factor should choose the TITAN X Pascal. Buyers who need maximum compute and memory bandwidth, and who can accommodate an SXM module with no outputs, should choose the A100.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB scores 201,096 versus 66,696 for the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, a 201.5% difference.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The A100 scores 173,198 and the TITAN X Pascal scores 77,499, giving the A100 a 123.5% advantage.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The A100 has 40 GB of HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 1.56 TB/s bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal has 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 480.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the TITAN X Pascal support display outputs?

A: Yes, it has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The A100 SXM4 has no display outputs.

Q: How do the two cards compare in transistor density?

A: The A100, built on a 7 nm process, achieves 65.6 million transistors per mm². The TITAN X Pascal, on a 16 nm process, achieves 25.1 million per mm².

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card?

A: The A100's closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation, 1.3% behind. The TITAN X Pascal's closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, 0.4% behind.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB | NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Architecture | Ampere | Pascal |

| Generation | Server Ampere (Axx) | GeForce 10 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 54,200 million | 11,800 million |

| Die Size | 826 mm² | 471 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.6M / mm² | 25.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1095 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1410 MHz | 1531 MHz |

| Memory Size | 40 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2e | GDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 5120 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.56 TB/s | 480.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 6912 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 432 | 224 |

| ROPs | 160 | 96 |

| Tensor Cores | 432 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 19.49 TFLOPS | 10.97 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1) | 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| Pixel Rate | 225.6 GPixel/s | 147.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 609.1 GTexel/s | 342.9 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 400 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | SXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 800 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | Not listed | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL | Not listed | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | Not listed | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2020-05-13 | 2016-08-01 |

| Predecessor | Tesla Turing | GeForce 900 |

| Successor | Server Ada | GeForce 20 |