NVIDIA A10M vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains one directly comparable compute test between the NVIDIA RTX 6000D and the NVIDIA A10M: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are decisive. The RTX 6000D scores 388,405 points, while the A10M scores 135,230 points. That represents a 187.2% advantage for the RTX 6000D, meaning it delivers nearly three times the raw compute throughput in this workload. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm in OpenCL performance.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the RTX 6000D's average benchmark score of 195,964 places it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB (194,415, a 0.8% deficit), the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB (187,147, a 4.7% deficit), and the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation (184,664, a 6.1% deficit). Interestingly, the RTX 6000D trails the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (207,124) by 5.4%, suggesting that while the new Blackwell part leads most legacy accelerators, the A100 PCIe 80 GB retains a measurable edge in aggregate benchmark scores.

The A10M, by contrast, sits at the 96th percentile with an average benchmark score of 135,230. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218, a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396, a -0.1% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (135,774, a -0.4% delta), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 (136,472, a -0.9% delta). The A10M is effectively tied with these cards, meaning it occupies a mid-range performance band rather than a leadership position. When the two cards in this comparison face off, the RTX 6000D wins the only head-to-head test by a margin that dwarfs any rivalry delta in either card's nearestRivals list.

The wins tally reflects this: 1 win for the RTX 6000D, 0 for the A10M. There is no benchmark in the data where the A10M comes out ahead. That said, the lack of a shared 3DMark Steel Nomad result — the RTX 6000D has a score of 3,522 in that DX12 test, while the A10M has no such entry — limits direct gaming or DXR comparison. The OpenCL result, however, is sufficient to establish a clear hierarchy in compute-oriented workloads.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 6000D is built on the GB202 chip using the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The A10M uses the GA102 chip with the older Ampere architecture, manufactured on Samsung's 8 nm process. This node difference is stark: the RTX 6000D packs 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The A10M, by comparison, has 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 45.1 million per square millimeter. The RTX 6000D achieves roughly 2.7 times the transistor density, a direct consequence of the more advanced process node.

The core configurations diverge dramatically. The RTX 6000D features 19,968 shading units, 624 texture mapping units, and 192 ROPs. It also carries 156 ray tracing cores and 624 tensor cores. The A10M has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores. In every category, the RTX 6000D has roughly 2.8 to 3.3 times the hardware resources. The FP32 compute rating reflects this: the RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS, while the A10M manages 23.44 TFLOPS. Both cards offer FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so the relative gap is identical in half-precision workloads.

Memory is another fundamental differentiator. The RTX 6000D uses 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus, achieving 1.40 TB/s of bandwidth. The A10M has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, with 500.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 6000D offers 4.2 times the memory capacity and 2.8 times the bandwidth. The memory clock rates differ as well: the RTX 6000D runs at 1560 MHz with 25 Gbps effective data rate, while the A10M runs at 1563 MHz with 12.5 Gbps effective. The effective rate advantage is the key factor, as both physical clocks are nearly identical.

Clock speeds also favor the RTX 6000D. Its base clock is 1992 MHz and boost reaches 2430 MHz, whereas the A10M has a base of 975 MHz and a boost of 1635 MHz. The RTX 6000D's boost clock is 48.6% higher, which compounds with the larger core count to produce the massive compute delta. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: the RTX 6000D achieves 466.6 GPixel/s and 1,516.3 GTexel/s, versus 130.8 GPixel/s and 366.2 GTexel/s for the A10M.

The two cards represent different generations and market positions. The RTX 6000D is from the Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation, released on 2025-07-13, and is currently listed as Active production. Its predecessor is Workstation Ada. The A10M belongs to the Server Ampere (Axx) generation, has no release date in the data, and is marked End-of-life. Its predecessor is Tesla Turing and its successor is Server Ada. The RTX 6000D uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the A10M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the RTX 6000D offers four DisplayPort 2.1b connections, while the A10M has no display outputs, reflecting its server-oriented design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only shared benchmark in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000D wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 388,405 versus the NVIDIA A10M's 135,230, a 187.2% advantage.

Q: How does the RTX 6000D compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB?

A: The RTX 6000D has an average benchmark score of 195,964, which is 0.8% higher than the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB's 194,415. It also sits 4.7% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB and 6.1% above the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation.

Q: Where does the A10M rank among its peers?

A: The A10M's average benchmark score of 135,230 places it in the 96th percentile of all GPUs. It is virtually tied with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (0% delta) and trails the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 by 0.1%.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two cards?

A: The RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus with 1.40 TB/s bandwidth. The A10M has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 500.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 6000D also has a higher effective memory rate of 25 Gbps versus 12.5 Gbps.

Q: How do the process nodes and transistor counts differ?

A: The RTX 6000D uses a 5 nm TSMC process with 92,200 million transistors, while the A10M uses an 8 nm Samsung process with 28,300 million transistors. The RTX 6000D's die is 750 mm² versus 628 mm² for the A10M.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute rating?

A: The RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 23.44 TFLOPS for the A10M. Both cards provide FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX 6000D | NVIDIA A10M |

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

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Generation | Blackwell PRO W (x000) | Server Ampere (Axx) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 92,200 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 750 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 122.9M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1992 MHz | 975 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2430 MHz | 1635 MHz |

| Memory Size | 84 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR7 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 448 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.40 TB/s | 500.2 GB/s |

| Effective Memory Rate | 25 Gbps | 12.5 Gbps |

| Shading Units | 19968 | 7168 |

| TMUs | 624 | 224 |

| ROPs | 192 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 156 | 56 |

| Tensor Cores | 624 | 224 |

| Pixel Rate | 466.6 GPixel/s | 130.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,516.3 GTexel/s | 366.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 / FP16 | 97.04 TFLOPS | 23.44 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 600 W | 150 W |

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

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | 450 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b | No outputs |

| Dimensions (L x H) | 304 mm x 137 mm | 267 mm x 112 mm |

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

| Release Date | 2025-07-13 | Not specified |

| Predecessor | Workstation Ada | Tesla Turing |

| Successor | None | Server Ada |

| Launch MSRP | 8,565 USD | Not specified |

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 6000D wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its 187.2% lead over the A10M in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with its 98th percentile standing versus the A10M's 96th, makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads such as large-scale simulation, AI training, or high-resolution rendering. The 84 GB of GDDR7 memory at 1.40 TB/s provides massive headroom for datasets that would exhaust the A10M's 20 GB GDDR6 pool. The RTX 6000D also offers display outputs, enabling workstation use with multiple monitors, whereas the A10M has none. Its PCIe 5.0 interface doubles the bandwidth of the A10M's PCIe 4.0, reducing data transfer bottlenecks in multi-GPU or high-I/O scenarios.

The A10M wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. At 150 W TDP with a single-slot design, it consumes one-quarter of the RTX 6000D's 600 W TDP and occupies half the slot width. Its suggested PSU of 450 W is less than half of the RTX 6000D's 1000 W requirement. For dense server deployments where power density, cooling, and space are constrained, the A10M offers a viable low-profile option. It also uses an 8-pin EPS connector, which may be more compatible with existing server power infrastructure than the RTX 6000D's 16-pin connector.

The A10M's nearest rivals are tightly clustered within 0.9% of its score, meaning it sits in a competitive mid-range band. The RTX 6000D, by contrast, leads most of its nearest rivals by 0.8% to 6.1%, though it lags the A100 PCIe 80 GB by 5.4%. For users who prioritize compute density per watt, the A10M is the sensible pick. For those who need maximum performance and are willing to accommodate a 304 mm dual-slot card with a 1000 W PSU, the RTX 6000D is the superior accelerator. The data shows no scenario where the A10M outperforms the RTX 6000D in raw speed, but its lower power draw and smaller form factor make it a practical choice for specific rack environments.