NVIDIA A10G vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA A10G dominates the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal across every recorded test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A10G scores 158,063 against 66,696 for the TITAN X Pascal, a 137% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the A10G posts 145,863 versus 77,499, an 88.2% lead. These are not marginal wins; they represent generational doubling of compute throughput in raw API workloads.

The average benchmark score reinforces this split. The A10G averages 151,963 across both tests, while the TITAN X Pascal averages 72,098. That places the A10G at the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the TITAN X Pascal sits at the 91st percentile. The gap between the two is roughly the same as the gap between the TITAN X Pascal and a mid-range modern GPU, which contextualizes how far the older card has fallen.

Looking at nearest rivals, the A10G’s performance is comparable to the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB, which averages 150,305, a mere 1.1% behind. The A10G also edges out the AMD Instinct MI100, which averages 139,035, by 9.3%. Meanwhile, the TITAN X Pascal’s nearest rivals cluster tightly: the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 averages 72,379, only 0.4% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 6650M averages 71,768, 0.5% ahead. This means the TITAN X Pascal is not merely older, it is effectively competitive only with cards from its own era, not with the A10G’s generation.

The Vulkan test shows a slightly smaller but still decisive margin. An 88.2% delta indicates that even in a lower-level API where the TITAN X Pascal’s Pascal architecture might theoretically have an edge due to simpler driver overhead, the A10G’s raw compute and memory bandwidth overwhelm it. In OpenCL, the 137% delta is even more pronounced, likely reflecting the A10G’s superior FP32 throughput and memory subsystem.

No test in the database shows the TITAN X Pascal winning. The head-to-head record is 2 wins for the A10G, 0 for the TITAN X Pascal. This is a clean sweep, and the data does not support any scenario where the older card closes the gap.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA A10G in OpenCL compared to the TITAN X Pascal?

A: The A10G scores 158,063 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 137% higher than the TITAN X Pascal’s 66,696. This is the largest single-test margin in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the TITAN X Pascal win any benchmark against the A10G?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head benchmarks show 2 wins for the A10G and 0 for the TITAN X Pascal. In Vulkan, the A10G leads 145,863 to 77,499, an 88.2% advantage.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The A10G averages 151,963 across its benchmark tests, while the TITAN X Pascal averages 72,098. That is a difference of 79,865 points, placing the A10G at the 97th percentile of all GPUs versus the 91st percentile for the TITAN X Pascal.

Q: Which GPU is closer to its nearest rival, the A10G or the TITAN X Pascal?

A: The TITAN X Pascal is closer to its nearest rival. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, averages 72,379, which is only 0.4% behind. The A10G’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB, averages 150,305, which is 1.1% behind, a slightly larger gap.

Q: How does the A10G compare to the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB?

A: The A100 PCIe 40 GB has a higher average score of 162,504, which is 6.5% ahead of the A10G. This places the A100 in a higher performance tier, but the A10G remains competitive within its own class.

Q: Is the TITAN X Pascal competitive with any modern GPU in the database?

A: The TITAN X Pascal’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6650M, which averages 71,768, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, which averages 70,829. These are close, with deltas of 0.5% and 1.8% respectively, indicating the TITAN X Pascal is still comparable to some current mid-range parts, but not to the A10G.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA A10G is built on the Ampere architecture, using the GA102 chip fabricated on an 8 nm Samsung process. It contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The TITAN X Pascal uses the Pascal architecture, with the GP102 chip on a 16 nm TSMC process, packing 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die at 25.1 million per mm².

The A10G has 9,216 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation units. It also includes 72 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, features completely absent from the TITAN X Pascal, which has no RT cores and no tensor cores. The TITAN X Pascal instead offers 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The A10G uses 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 600.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal has 12 GB of GDDR5X memory on the same 384-bit bus, but bandwidth is lower at 480.4 GB/s. The A10G’s memory clock is 1563 MHz with 12.5 Gbps effective, while the TITAN X Pascal runs at 1251 MHz with 10 Gbps effective.

Compute capability is starkly different. The A10G delivers 31.52 TFLOPS of FP32 and the same 31.52 TFLOPS of FP16, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The TITAN X Pascal offers 10.97 TFLOPS of FP32 and only 171.5 GFLOPS of FP16, a 1:64 ratio. This makes the A10G roughly 2.9 times faster in FP32 and over 180 times faster in FP16, a critical metric for AI workloads.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The A10G achieves 164.2 GPixel/s and 492.5 GTexel/s, while the TITAN X Pascal reaches 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s. The A10G’s advantage is more pronounced in texture fill, reflecting its higher TMU count and clock.

Power and physical design diverge as well. The A10G has a TDP of 150 W and is a single-slot card with an 8-pin EPS connector, suggesting a 450 W PSU. The TITAN X Pascal has a TDP of 250 W, is dual-slot, requires 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 600 W PSU. Both cards share the same length and height: 267 mm and 112 mm. The TITAN X Pascal adds a 40 mm width, while the A10G’s width is not specified in the database.

The A10G is a server-oriented card with no display outputs, while the TITAN X Pascal includes 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The A10G supports PCIe 4.0 x16, whereas the TITAN X Pascal uses PCIe 3.0 x16. API support also differs: the A10G supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the TITAN X Pascal supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA A10G | NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | Pascal |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 16 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 11,800 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 471 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.1M / mm² | 25.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1320 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1710 MHz | 1531 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Clock | 1563 MHz / 12.5 Gbps | 1251 MHz / 10 Gbps |

| Bandwidth | 600.2 GB/s | 480.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 9216 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 288 | 224 |

| ROPs | 96 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 72 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 288 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 164.2 GPixel/s | 147.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 492.5 GTexel/s | 342.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 31.52 TFLOPS | 10.97 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 31.52 TFLOPS (1:1) | 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 150 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 8-pin EPS | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 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 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA A10G wins in every benchmark category recorded. Its FP32 compute is 31.52 TFLOPS versus 10.97 TFLOPS, making it the clear choice for general compute, simulation, and any workload that relies on single-precision floating point. Its FP16 performance, at 31.52 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, is exceptional for machine learning inference and training where mixed-precision is standard. The 288 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for matrix operations, which the TITAN X Pascal lacks entirely.

Memory capacity and bandwidth favor the A10G. With 24 GB of GDDR6 and 600.2 GB/s, it can handle larger datasets and more concurrent memory requests than the TITAN X Pascal’s 12 GB and 480.4 GB/s. This matters for deep learning batch sizes, large frame buffers, and multi-tenant virtualization scenarios.

The A10G’s 72 RT cores make it suitable for real-time ray tracing workloads, though the database does not include specific ray tracing benchmarks. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support means it can run the latest graphics features, whereas the TITAN X Pascal is limited to DirectX 12_1.

The TITAN X Pascal retains one practical advantage: display outputs. It has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, allowing direct monitor connection. The A10G has no outputs, making it a compute-only card. For a desktop user who needs both compute and display, the TITAN X Pascal is functional, but for server or cloud deployment, the A10G is purpose-built.

Power efficiency also favors the A10G. It achieves higher performance at 150 W TDP compared to the TITAN X Pascal’s 250 W TDP. The A10G’s single-slot design and 8-pin EPS connector make it easier to install in dense servers, while the TITAN X Pascal’s dual-slot footprint and dual connectors require more space and power headroom.

The Verdict

The data is conclusive: the NVIDIA A10G is the superior GPU in nearly every measurable dimension. Its average benchmark score of 151,963 is more than double the TITAN X Pascal’s 72,098, and it wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 137% and 88.2%. The A10G is at the 97th percentile of all GPUs, while the TITAN X Pascal is at the 91st, a meaningful gap in the database’s ranking.

For compute-focused users, the A10G is the only rational choice. Its 24 GB memory, 600.2 GB/s bandwidth, 31.52 TFLOPS FP32, and 31.52 TFLOPS FP16 make it suitable for AI, scientific computing, and high-performance rendering. The 288 tensor cores and 72 RT cores add specialized capability that the TITAN X Pascal cannot match. The A10G’s lower TDP of 150 W and single-slot form factor make it more efficient for data center deployment.

The TITAN X Pascal is a legacy card. Its only advantages are display outputs and a slightly higher base clock of 1417 MHz versus 1320 MHz, which does not translate into benchmark wins. Its 12 GB memory and 480.4 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for older games and basic compute, but it is not competitive with the A10G in any recorded test. Its nearest rivals are all AMD Radeon cards from a similar era, confirming that it belongs to an older performance tier.

Who should pick the A10G? Anyone running server workloads, machine learning models, or large-scale graphics processing where compute density and memory capacity are critical. Who should pick the TITAN X Pascal? Only those who require native display output and have no need for tensor cores, RT cores, or modern API support beyond DirectX 12_1. The benchmark record shows no scenario where the TITAN X Pascal outperforms the A10G, so the verdict is straightforward: the A10G is the benchmark winner, and the TITAN X Pascal is a relic of the Pascal generation.