NVIDIA A10M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data separates these two NVIDIA accelerators into clearly distinct roles. The NVIDIA A10M, an Ampere-generation server product, delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 135,230. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, reaches 334,370 in the same test. That single head-to-head result gives the RTX 5090 the only win in the recorded comparison, with a delta of -59.6% from the perspective of the A10M. In plain terms, the RTX 5090 outperforms the A10M by roughly 2.5 times in OpenCL compute workloads.

The A10M does not win any of the recorded benchmark comparisons. Its strongest position comes from its percentile ranking: 96th among all GPUs, compared to the RTX 5090's 92nd percentile. That percentile gap reflects the A10M's placement among professional server parts, where its single benchmark result sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 and within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo. The RTX 5090, by contrast, sits near the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (0.3% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (1.1% delta) in its nearest-rival grouping, a mix of older datacenter and mobile-class parts that its average score of 79,842 reflects.

The RTX 5090's benchmark portfolio is broader. The database records scores for 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) at 18,355, Passmark G3D at 39,650, and Passmark GPU Compute at 26,756. It also shows DirectX 9 through 12 results in Passmark, with the DirectX 9 score of 395 being its highest legacy API result. The A10M has only the single OpenCL measurement, so its win profile is limited to that one workload. The data suggests the A10M is a compute-focused server part with no display outputs, while the RTX 5090 carries a full suite of gaming and general-purpose benchmarks.

The Verdict

For users selecting a GPU strictly from the recorded data, the choice depends on the workload. The RTX 5090 is the clear compute winner in OpenCL, delivering 334,370 versus 135,230, a 59.6% margin. It also offers a larger memory pool (32 GB of GDDR7 versus 20 GB of GDDR6), a wider 512-bit bus versus 320-bit, and substantially higher raw throughput numbers. The data shows the RTX 5090 at 104.8 TFLOPS FP32, 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 1,636.8 GTexel/s texture rate, all far above the A10M's 23.44 TFLOPS, 130.8 GPixel/s, and 366.2 GTexel/s.

The A10M's case rests on its server-oriented design. It is single-slot, uses an 8-pin EPS power connector, draws 150 W TDP, and has no display outputs. The RTX 5090 is dual-slot, requires a 16-pin connector, draws 575 W, and includes HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The A10M's 267 mm length and 112 mm height fit tighter chassis constraints, while the RTX 5090 measures 304 mm by 137 mm by 40 mm.

The A10M is end-of-life, while the RTX 5090 is active and launched on 2025-01-29 with a launch MSRP of 1,999 USD. The A10M's predecessor is Tesla Turing and its successor is Server Ada; the RTX 5090's predecessor is GeForce 40 and successor is GeForce 60. The data does not record a release date for the A10M, so its market position is defined by its current production status and benchmark profile. For raw performance per watt, the A10M's 150 W TDP with 23.44 TFLOPS yields a higher efficiency than the RTX 5090's 575 W with 104.8 TFLOPS, but the RTX 5090's absolute performance is far greater.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The A10M scores 135,230, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370. The delta is -59.6%, meaning the RTX 5090 is 59.6% faster than the A10M in this workload. That is a substantial margin, roughly 2.47 times the A10M's result. The RTX 5090 also demonstrates strength across other tests, though no direct A10M scores exist for those. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355 and Passmark G3D score of 39,650 indicate strong modern API performance. The Passmark DirectX 9 score of 395 is its highest legacy API result, while DirectX 11 at 341 and DirectX 10 at 226 trail behind.

The A10M's nearest rivals in the database help contextualize its OpenCL result. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396, a 0.1% delta against the A10M. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135,774, a 0.4% delta. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation scores 135,218, a 0% delta. These results place the A10M in a narrow band of professional workstation GPUs, all within 0.9% of each other. The RTX 5090's nearest rivals, by contrast, span a wider performance range: the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB at 79,605 (0.3% delta), the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB at 79,396 (0.6% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78,940 (1.1% delta). The RTX 5090's average score of 79,842 is pulled down by the inclusion of those Passmark and 3DMark results, which are not directly comparable to the OpenCL-only A10M average of 135,230.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 scores 334,370, while the NVIDIA A10M scores 135,230. The RTX 5090 wins with a 59.6% delta.

Q: What is the A10M's closest rival in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation scores 135,218, a 0% delta from the A10M's 135,230. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 is also close at 135,396, a -0.1% delta.

Q: What is the RTX 5090's closest rival in the database?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB scores 79,605, a 0.3% delta from the RTX 5090's average of 79,842. The Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB is at 79,396, a 0.6% delta.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The A10M uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 500.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power connector requirements?

A: The A10M uses an 8-pin EPS connector with a 150 W TDP and a suggested 450 W PSU. The RTX 5090 uses a 16-pin connector with a 575 W TDP and a suggested 950 W PSU.

Q: Does the A10M have display outputs?

A: No, the A10M lists "No outputs" for display connections. The RTX 5090 includes 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs.

Architecture Differences

The A10M uses the GA102 chip on the Ampere architecture, manufactured on Samsung's 8 nm process. It contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². The RTX 5090 uses the GB202 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. It contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, with a density of 122.9M per mm². The density difference is significant: the RTX 5090 packs more than 2.7 times the transistors per square millimeter.

The A10M's memory subsystem uses 20 GB of GDDR6 with a 320-bit bus, achieving 500.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 with a 512-bit bus, achieving 1.79 TB/s. The RTX 5090's memory clock is 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective, while the A10M's is 1563 MHz with 12.5 Gbps effective. The RTX 5090's bandwidth is roughly 3.6 times the A10M's.

Core counts differ substantially. The A10M has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The RTX 5090 has 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. Ray tracing cores: 56 on the A10M versus 170 on the RTX 5090. Tensor cores: 224 on the A10M versus 680 on the RTX 5090. The FP32 and FP16 compute rates are both 23.44 TFLOPS on the A10M (1:1 ratio) and 104.8 TFLOPS on the RTX 5090 (also 1:1). Pixel rate is 130.8 GPixel/s on the A10M versus 423.6 GPixel/s on the RTX 5090. Texture rate is 366.2 GTexel/s versus 1,636.8 GTexel/s.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The A10M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RTX 5090 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The A10M is single-slot; the RTX 5090 is dual-slot. The A10M has no display outputs; the RTX 5090 has HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1b.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification. The A10M is from the Server Ampere generation, while the RTX 5090 is from GeForce 50. The process node: 8 nm Samsung versus 5 nm TSMC. Transistors: 28,300 million versus 92,200 million. Die size: 628 mm² versus 750 mm². Transistor density: 45.1M per mm² versus 122.9M per mm².

Base clock: 975 MHz on the A10M versus 2017 MHz on the RTX 5090. Boost clock: 1635 MHz versus 2407 MHz. Memory clock: 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). Memory size: 20 GB versus 32 GB. Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR7. Bus width: 320-bit versus 512-bit. Bandwidth: 500.2 GB/s versus 1.79 TB/s.

Shading units: 7,168 versus 21,760. TMUs: 224 versus 680. ROPs: 80 versus 176. RT cores: 56 versus 170. Tensor cores: 224 versus 680. Pixel rate: 130.8 GPixel/s versus 423.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 366.2 GTexel/s versus 1,636.8 GTexel/s. FP32: 23.44 TFLOPS versus 104.8 TFLOPS. FP16: 23.44 TFLOPS versus 104.8 TFLOPS.

TDP: 150 W versus 575 W. Slot width: single-slot versus dual-slot. Power connectors: 8-pin EPS versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU: 450 W versus 950 W. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs: none versus 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. Dimensions: 267 mm by 112 mm versus 304 mm by 137 mm by 40 mm. Production status: end-of-life versus active. Release date: not recorded versus 2025-01-29. Predecessor: Tesla Turing versus GeForce 40. Successor: Server Ada versus GeForce 60. Launch MSRP: not recorded versus 1,999 USD.