NVIDIA A10G vs NVIDIA GB10 Comparison

The NVIDIA A10G and NVIDIA GB10 are two very different server-grade accelerators that happen to share a manufacturer but little else in terms of positioning. The A10G is an end-of-life Ampere card from 2021, while the GB10 is an active Blackwell part from 2025. Benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the GB10 counters with a substantially larger memory pool and a much newer architecture. This analysis breaks down the raw numbers, architectural shifts, and practical implications for workload selection.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The A10G wins both recorded benchmark tests decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A10G scores 158,063 against the GB10’s 120,137, a delta of 31.6%. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: the A10G posts 145,863 while the GB10 manages 114,648, a 27.2% advantage. These are not marginal gaps; they represent a generational split in raw compute throughput. The A10G’s FP32 rating of 31.52 TFLOPS edges out the GB10’s 29.71 TFLOPS, which aligns with the benchmark results.

The GB10 does not win a single head-to-head test. Its average benchmark score of 117,393 places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, which is respectable, but the A10G sits at the 97th percentile with an average score of 151,963. That 34,570-point gap in average score is substantial. When compared to its nearest rivals, the GB10 is nearly tied with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (0.3% ahead) and the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (1.3% behind), but it trails the A10G by a wide margin in every measured test.

The A10G’s nearest rivals provide context for its performance tier. It sits 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB, 9.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI100, but 5.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X and 6.5% behind the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB. This places the A10G in a solid mid-to-upper tier for compute, whereas the GB10’s rivals are all lower-powered or mobile parts. The GB10’s closest competitor, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada, is a compact workstation card, highlighting that the GB10 is not aimed at the same peak-throughput segment as the A10G.

Where Each One Wins

The A10G wins on raw compute performance. Its 31.52 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1) capabilities, combined with 9,216 shading units and 288 tensor cores, make it the stronger choice for compute-bound tasks like inference, rendering, or simulation. The data shows a 31.6% lead in OpenCL and 27.2% in Vulkan, which are direct indicators of general-purpose and graphics-adjacent workloads. If the task requires maximum throughput per benchmark score, the A10G is the clear pick.

The GB10 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth efficiency per watt. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory is more than five times the A10G’s 24 GB of GDDR6. While the GB10’s bandwidth is lower at 273.2 GB/s versus 600.2 GB/s, the raw capacity allows for loading much larger models or datasets into VRAM without spilling to system memory. The GB10 also has a higher texture rate at 928.5 GTexel/s versus the A10G’s 492.5 GTexel/s, suggesting it excels at texture-heavy workloads despite lower overall compute. The GB10’s 384 tensor cores versus the A10G’s 288 also indicate a newer tensor core design, likely more efficient per core.

For power-sensitive deployments, the GB10’s 140 W TDP is slightly lower than the A10G’s 150 W, and it requires no external power connectors—it is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) that draws from the PCIe slot. The A10G needs an 8-pin EPS connector and a 450 W suggested PSU, while the GB10 suggests a 300 W PSU. This makes the GB10 easier to integrate into compact or low-power servers.

Architecture Differences

The A10G is built on the GA102 chip using the Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It packs 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². The GB10 uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. Its die size is 382 mm², which is smaller than the A10G’s, but the transistor count is listed as unknown. The density figure is not provided for the GB10, but the smaller die on a more advanced process suggests a more modern design.

Memory configurations differ fundamentally. The A10G uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 600.2 GB/s. The GB10 uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The A10G’s wider bus and higher bandwidth favor high-throughput streaming, while the GB10’s massive capacity favors large working sets. The GB10 also uses a faster boost clock at 2418 MHz versus the A10G’s 1710 MHz, though the A10G has a higher base clock at 1320 MHz versus 1665 MHz for the GB10.

Shading unit counts differ: the A10G has 9,216 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, while the GB10 has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and only 48 ROPs. The GB10’s higher TMU count explains its superior texture rate, but its lower ROP count and shading unit count explain its lower pixel rate (116.1 GPixel/s versus 164.2 GPixel/s) and FP32 throughput. The A10G has 72 RT cores versus the GB10’s 48, but the GB10 has 384 tensor cores versus the A10G’s 288.

Bus interface and physical design are also distinct. The A10G uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and is a single-slot card measuring 267 mm in length. The GB10 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and is an IGP with dimensions of 150 mm by 51 mm by 150 mm, plus a single HDMI output. The A10G has no display outputs. API support also diverges: the A10G supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the GB10 lists N/A for all three, indicating it is compute-focused with no graphics API support.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA A10G leads with 31.52 TFLOPS FP32 versus the GB10’s 29.71 TFLOPS. This is reflected in benchmark scores: the A10G wins OpenCL by 31.6% and Vulkan by 27.2%.

Q: Does the GB10 offer any advantage in memory?

A: Yes, the GB10 has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory compared to the A10G’s 24 GB of GDDR6. However, the A10G has higher bandwidth at 600.2 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The A10G has a 150 W TDP, requires an 8-pin EPS connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The GB10 has a 140 W TDP, needs no power connectors, and suggests a 300 W PSU.

Q: Which card has a newer architecture?

A: The GB10 uses Blackwell 2.0 on a 5 nm process, while the A10G uses Ampere on an 8 nm process. The GB10 also has a higher boost clock at 2418 MHz versus 1710 MHz.

Q: Can either card output video?

A: The A10G has no display outputs. The GB10 has one HDMI output, though its API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan is listed as N/A.

Q: How do they compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The A10G sits 1.1% ahead of the Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB and 9.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI100, but trails the Radeon Pro W6800X by 5.4%. The GB10 is 0.3% ahead of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada and 2.6% ahead of the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB.

The Verdict

Choose the A10G if your priority is maximum compute throughput in established workloads. The data shows it is 31.6% faster in OpenCL and 27.2% faster in Vulkan than the GB10. Its 600.2 GB/s bandwidth and 24 GB of GDDR6 memory are well-suited for high-speed data streaming, and its 97th percentile ranking versus the GB10’s 95th confirms its higher standing. The A10G is the better choice for FP32-heavy compute, especially if you already have PCIe 4.0 infrastructure and can supply the 450 W PSU.

Choose the GB10 if you need massive memory capacity or a low-power, compact solution. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory is unmatched in this comparison, enabling workloads that simply cannot fit in 24 GB. Its 140 W TDP, no power connectors, and IGP form factor make it far easier to deploy in dense or power-constrained environments. The GB10’s PCIe 5.0 interface and newer 5 nm process also suggest better future-proofing for memory-bound tasks, despite its lower raw compute. The 3,999 USD launch MSRP is a data point, but the decision should hinge on workload fit.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA A10G | NVIDIA GB10 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | Unknown |

| Base Clock | 1320 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1710 MHz | 2418 MHz |

| Memory Size | 24 GB GDDR6 | 128 GB LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 600.2 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 9216 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 288 | 384 |

| ROPs | 96 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 72 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | 288 | 384 |

| Pixel Rate | 164.2 GPixel/s | 116.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 492.5 GTexel/s | 928.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 31.52 TFLOPS | 29.71 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 140 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 8-pin EPS | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI |

| API Support | DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 | N/A |

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

| Release Date | 2021-04-11 | 2025-10-14 |