NVIDIA A2 vs NVIDIA TITAN RTX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains two direct comparison results between the NVIDIA A2 and the NVIDIA TITAN RTX, and in both cases the TITAN RTX is the clear winner. The margin is substantial, not marginal. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the TITAN RTX scores 144,858 points against the A2's 35,357 points. That translates to a delta of -75.6% for the A2, meaning the TITAN RTX outperforms the A2 by roughly a factor of four in raw compute throughput as measured by this workload.

The Vulkan results tell a nearly identical story. The TITAN RTX posts 136,073 points, while the A2 manages 34,023 points. The delta here is -75%, again placing the TITAN RTX about four times ahead. Both tests are consistent: the TITAN RTX dominates the A2 in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, with no test where the A2 claims victory.

Looking at the broader average benchmark scores reinforces this gap. The A2 has an average benchmark score of 34,690, while the TITAN RTX sits at 31,676. This is an interesting reversal: despite winning both head-to-head tests by a wide margin, the TITAN RTX has a lower average score overall. That discrepancy stems from the different benchmark suites each card was subjected to. The A2 was measured only in Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, where it scored 35,357 and 34,023 respectively. The TITAN RTX was put through a much wider array of tests, including 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (3,794), Passmark DirectX 10 (147), DirectX 11 (189), DirectX 12 (88), DirectX 9 (223), G2D (860), G3D (20,491), and GPU Compute (10,034). Those older DirectX and 2D workloads drag its average down, even though its peak compute scores are far higher.

Percentile rankings also reflect a nuanced picture. The A2 sits at the 79th percentile among all GPUs, while the TITAN RTX is at the 76th percentile. So in the overall distribution, the A2 actually ranks slightly higher, despite losing every head-to-head test. This likely reflects the fact that the A2's two recorded benchmarks are modern compute-oriented tests, while the TITAN RTX's suite includes legacy workloads that penalize its average. The nearest rivals for the A2 include the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (average score 34,561, delta 0.4%), the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541, delta 0.4%), the NVIDIA TITAN V (34,355, delta 1%), and the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34,207, delta 1.4%). For the TITAN RTX, nearest rivals are the Intel Arc Pro A30M (31,894, delta -0.7%), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532, delta 0.5%), the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q (31,220, delta 1.5%), and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (31,206, delta 1.5%).

In practical terms, the head-to-head data says this: if your workload is captured by Geekbench OpenCL or Vulkan, the TITAN RTX is roughly four times faster than the A2. There is no ambiguity in these results.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and vastly different implementations. The NVIDIA A2 is built on the Ampere architecture, specifically the GA107 chip, and belongs to the Workstation Ampere generation (codenamed Ax000). It is fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The die contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² slice of silicon, yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The TITAN RTX, by contrast, uses the Turing architecture with the TU102 chip, from the GeForce 20 generation. It is built on TSMC's 12 nm process. The die is substantially larger at 754 mm² and packs 18,600 million transistors, but the density is lower at 24.7 million per square millimeter. So the A2 is a smaller, denser chip, while the TITAN RTX is a massive, relatively less dense die.

The compute resources differ at every level. The A2 has 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. It also carries 10 RT cores and 40 tensor cores. The TITAN RTX has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. That is a 3.6x advantage in shaders, 7.2x in TMUs, 3x in ROPs, 7.2x in RT cores, and 14.4x in tensor cores. Clock speeds are similar at boost: both hit 1,770 MHz. Base clocks differ slightly, with the A2 at 1,440 MHz and the TITAN RTX at 1,350 MHz. But the massive difference in execution units overwhelms the modest clock advantage the A2 holds.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 200.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN RTX has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, with 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That is 3.36x more bandwidth and 1.5x more capacity. The effective memory speed is 12.5 Gbps for the A2 versus 14 Gbps for the TITAN RTX, but the wider bus is what truly separates them.

The FP32 compute rates tell the performance story directly: the A2 achieves 4.531 TFLOPS, while the TITAN RTX reaches 16.31 TFLOPS, a 3.6x gap. FP16 is where the architectures diverge further. The A2 does 4.531 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning no dedicated half-precision acceleration. The TITAN RTX does 32.62 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, doubling its FP32 throughput for half-precision work.

Power and physical specifications differ as much as the silicon. The A2 has a 60 W TDP, is single-slot, and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The TITAN RTX has a 280 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 600 W PSU. The A2 has no display outputs, while the TITAN RTX offers 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C. The TITAN RTX measures 267 mm in length, 116 mm in height, and 35 mm in width. The A2 has no recorded dimensions.

Bus interfaces also differ: the A2 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the TITAN RTX uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The TITAN RTX wins decisively. It scores 144,858 versus the A2's 35,357, a delta of -75.6% for the A2.

Q: How do the cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The TITAN RTX again wins by a large margin, scoring 136,073 against the A2's 34,023, a delta of -75%.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths?

A: The A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 200.1 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN RTX has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more tensor cores and RT cores?

A: The TITAN RTX has 576 tensor cores and 72 RT cores. The A2 has 40 tensor cores and 10 RT cores.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The A2 has a 60 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The TITAN RTX has a 280 W TDP, requires two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 600 W PSU.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two cards differ.

| Specification | NVIDIA A2 | NVIDIA TITAN RTX |

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

| Chip | GA107 | TU102 |

| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |

| Generation | Workstation Ampere (Ax000) | GeForce 20 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 18,600 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 754 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 24.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1440 MHz | 1350 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1563 MHz, 12.5 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 200.1 GB/s | 672.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 40 | 288 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 10 | 72 |

| Tensor Cores | 40 | 576 |

| Pixel Rate | 56.64 GPixel/s | 169.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 70.80 GTexel/s | 509.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.531 TFLOPS | 16.31 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.531 TFLOPS (1:1) | 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 60 W | 280 W |

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

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C |

| Length | Not recorded | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | Not recorded | 116 mm (4.6 inches) |

| Width | Not recorded | 35 mm (1.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2021-11-09 | 2018-12-17 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Turing | GeForce 10 |

| Successor | Workstation Ada | GeForce 30 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 2,499 USD |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous on raw performance: the TITAN RTX beats the A2 in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, with deltas of -75.6% in OpenCL and -75% in Vulkan. If the sole criterion is compute throughput in these modern API workloads, the TITAN RTX is the superior card by a factor of approximately four.

But the average benchmark scores and percentile rankings complicate a simple "TITAN RTX is better" conclusion. The A2 has a higher average score (34,690 versus 31,676) and a higher percentile ranking (79th versus 76th). This is because the TITAN RTX was tested across a wider range of workloads, including legacy DirectX 9, 10, and 11 tests where it scores poorly relative to its modern compute performance. The A2's benchmark suite is narrow, consisting only of Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, which are modern and compute-focused.

The physical and power profiles also point in opposite directions. The A2 is a 60 W, single-slot, connector-free card with no display outputs. It is designed for low-power, headless compute deployments. The TITAN RTX is a 280 W, dual-slot card with two 8-pin connectors, a 600 W suggested PSU, and full display outputs. It is a high-power workstation card.

The verdict depends on context. For raw compute performance in OpenCL and Vulkan, the TITAN RTX is the clear choice, and the delta is so large that no other consideration matters. For low-power, dense, or embedded-style deployments where display output is unnecessary and power draw is critical, the A2's 60 W TDP and lack of connectors are defining advantages. The TITAN RTX also carries a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD, while the A2 has no recorded launch MSRP, so any cost comparison is impossible from the data.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA TITAN RTX wins on: Every head-to-head benchmark. It posts 144,858 in OpenCL versus 35,357, and 136,073 in Vulkan versus 34,023. It also wins on memory bandwidth (672.0 GB/s versus 200.1 GB/s), memory capacity (24 GB versus 16 GB), shading units (4,608 versus 1,280), tensor cores (576 versus 40), RT cores (72 versus 10), FP32 compute (16.31 TFLOPS versus 4.531 TFLOPS), and FP16 compute (32.62 TFLOPS versus 4.531 TFLOPS). Its texture rate (509.8 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (169.9 GPixel/s) are both far ahead of the A2's 70.80 GTexel/s and 56.64 GPixel/s. It also offers display outputs, which the A2 lacks entirely.

NVIDIA A2 wins on: Power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 60 W TDP is less than a quarter of the TITAN RTX's 280 W. It is single-slot with no power connectors, while the TITAN RTX is dual-slot with two 8-pin connectors. The A2's suggested PSU is 250 W versus 600 W for the TITAN RTX. It also uses a newer PCIe 4.0 x8 interface versus PCIe 3.0 x16, and has a higher base clock (1,440 MHz versus 1,350 MHz). The A2 has a higher transistor density (43.5M per mm² versus 24.7M per mm²) on a smaller die (200 mm² versus 754 mm²), and it was released later (2021 versus 2018). Its average benchmark score (34,690) and percentile ranking (79th) are also higher than the TITAN RTX's (31,676 and 76th), reflecting its consistent performance across its narrower test suite.