NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the primary benchmark difference between the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the RTX 5090 scores 376,728, while the A100 SXM4 80 GB scores 183,725. The RTX 5090 wins by a margin of 51.2%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The A100 SXM4 80 GB offers 80 GB of HBM2e memory with a 5120-bit bus and 2.04 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The A100 has more than double the capacity and 14% more bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 5090 delivers 104.8 TFLOPS FP32, which is over five times the A100's 19.49 TFLOPS. The RTX 5090 also matches its FP32 output in FP16 (104.8 TFLOPS at 1:1), whereas the A100's FP16 is 77.97 TFLOPS at a 4:1 ratio.

Q: What are the process node and transistor differences between the two GPUs?

A: The A100 uses TSMC's 7 nm process with 54,200 million transistors on an 826 mm² die, giving a density of 65.6M transistors per mm². The RTX 5090 uses TSMC's 5 nm process with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, achieving 122.9M transistors per mm².

Q: Which card is positioned for gaming workloads based on the data?

A: The RTX 5090 is clearly gaming-oriented: it has dedicated ray tracing cores (170), supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b). The A100 has no display outputs and no listed API support.

Q: What are the physical and power requirements of each card?

A: The RTX 5090 is a dual-slot card measuring 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm, with a 575 W TDP, a single 16-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 950 W. The A100 is an OAM module with a 400 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 800 W.

The Verdict

The database shows two entirely different products with different purposes. The RTX 5090 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench Vulkan) by a 51.2% margin, and it holds a commanding lead in raw compute metrics: 5.4x higher FP32, 2.4x higher pixel rate, and 2.7x higher texture rate. It also brings modern gaming features, a newer architecture, and a much smaller die with higher transistor density.

The A100 SXM4 80 GB, however, remains relevant for memory-bound server workloads. Its 80 GB of HBM2e with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth is unmatched by the RTX 5090's 32 GB GDDR7 at 1.79 TB/s. The A100 also has a lower TDP (400 W vs 575 W) and no power connector requirement, which matters in dense server configurations.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision is straightforward: if the workload involves gaming, ray tracing, or general-purpose compute that benefits from massive FP32 throughput, the RTX 5090 is the clear choice. If the job needs large memory capacity for training or inference with huge models, and the system can accommodate an OAM module without display output, the A100 remains a viable option, though it is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 5090 scores 376,728 against the A100's 183,725, a delta of 51.2%. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the RTX 5090 is more than twice as fast in this API-based workload.

Beyond that single test, the broader benchmark data reinforces this gap. The RTX 5090's average benchmark score across all tests is 79,842, while the A100's average is 183,725. However, this comparison is skewed because the A100 has only one benchmark entry, while the RTX 5090 has ten, including multiple Passmark tests that drag its average down.

The RTX 5090's individual scores paint a clear picture: 334,370 in Geekbench OpenCL, 39,650 in Passmark G3D, and 26,756 in Passmark GPU Compute. The A100's single Vulkan score of 183,725 falls between the RTX 5090's Vulkan and OpenCL results, but it is far below the RTX 5090's Vulkan score. In practical terms, the RTX 5090 is the faster card for compute workloads that use modern APIs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 |

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

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 54,200 million | 92,200 million |

| Die Size | 826 mm² | 750 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.6M / mm² | 122.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1275 MHz | 2017 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1410 MHz | 2407 MHz |

| Memory Size | 80 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2e | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 5120 bit | 512 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 2.04 TB/s | 1.79 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 6912 | 21760 |

| TMUs | 432 | 680 |

| ROPs | 160 | 176 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 170 |

| Tensor Cores | 432 | 680 |

| FP32 | 19.49 TFLOPS | 104.8 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1) | 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 225.6 GPixel/s | 423.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 609.1 GTexel/s | 1,636.8 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 400 W | 575 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 800 W | 950 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| DirectX Support | None | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL Support | None | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | None | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | N/A | 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2020-11-15 | 2025-01-29 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

The RTX 5090 is newer, denser, faster-clocked, and has more of every compute unit type. The A100's only specification advantages are memory capacity and bus width, plus a lower power draw.

Architecture Differences

The A100 is built on the Ampere architecture (GA100 chip) for the server market, while the RTX 5090 uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture (GB202 chip) for the GeForce 50 series. This architectural gap spans two generations and explains most of the performance difference.

The process technology moved from 7 nm to 5 nm, allowing the RTX 5090 to pack 92,200 million transistors into a smaller die (750 mm² vs 826 mm²). The transistor density nearly doubled, from 65.6M per mm² to 122.9M per mm². This density increase, combined with much higher clocks (2017 MHz base vs 1275 MHz base), drives the RTX 5090's massive compute advantage.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The A100 uses HBM2e with a 5120-bit bus, which is typical for server accelerators that need enormous bandwidth. The RTX 5090 uses GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, which is narrower but still delivers 1.79 TB/s. The A100's wider bus and larger capacity target data-center workloads, while the RTX 5090's GDDR7 is designed for consumer gaming and content creation.

Feature support diverges sharply. The RTX 5090 has 170 dedicated ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores, with full API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The A100 has no ray tracing cores, 432 tensor cores, and no listed API support. The A100 also lacks display outputs entirely, confirming its role as a compute-only accelerator.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 wins in every measured compute benchmark. The Geekbench Vulkan score is 51.2% higher. Its FP32 throughput (104.8 TFLOPS) is more than five times the A100's (19.49 TFLOPS). The RTX 5090 also has a 2.4x advantage in pixel rate (423.6 vs 225.6 GPixel/s) and a 2.7x advantage in texture rate (1,636.8 vs 609.1 GTexel/s). It has more shading units (21,760 vs 6,912), more TMUs (680 vs 432), more ROPs (176 vs 160), and more tensor cores (680 vs 432). For any workload that uses modern graphics APIs or general-purpose compute, the RTX 5090 is the superior choice.

The A100 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. With 80 GB of HBM2e versus 32 GB of GDDR7, the A100 can hold larger datasets in memory, which is critical for training large AI models or processing massive simulation data. Its bandwidth advantage (2.04 TB/s vs 1.79 TB/s) also helps in memory-bound workloads. The A100's lower TDP (400 W vs 575 W) and lack of power connectors make it easier to integrate into existing server infrastructure, and its OAM form factor is standard in data-center deployments.

For gaming and real-time graphics: choose the RTX 5090. It has ray tracing cores, display outputs, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The A100 cannot output video at all.

For AI training with huge models: the A100's 80 GB capacity is the deciding factor. The RTX 5090's 32 GB may be insufficient for models that exceed that limit.

For high-throughput FP32 compute: the RTX 5090 is the clear winner. Its 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 is unmatched by the A100's 19.49 TFLOPS. Even in FP16, the RTX 5090's 104.8 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio exceeds the A100's 77.97 TFLOPS at 4:1.

For power-conscious deployments: the A100's 400 W TDP and no-connector design are advantages in dense server racks. The RTX 5090 requires 575 W and a dedicated 16-pin connector.

For longevity: the RTX 5090 is an active product released in 2025, while the A100 is end-of-life from 2020. The RTX 5090 has a successor already planned (GeForce 60), but it remains actively supported. The A100's successor (Server Ada) has already shipped, and the platform is aging.