NVIDIA B200 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

The NVIDIA B200 and NVIDIA RTX A5500 occupy opposite ends of the professional GPU spectrum. The B200 is a server-class Blackwell accelerator designed for massive compute throughput, while the RTX A5500 is a workstation Ampere card built for broad compatibility. The benchmark data confirms this division, showing a dominant performance gap that is accompanied by equally significant differences in architecture, memory, and physical design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark available in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisively lopsided. The NVIDIA B200 scores 345,482 points, while the NVIDIA RTX A5500 manages 174,637 points. This yields a delta of 97.8% in favor of the B200, meaning the B200 nearly doubles the A5500’s raw compute output in this test. The B200’s score places it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it outperforms every other recorded device in the database. In contrast, the RTX A5500 sits at the 97th percentile, which is still elite but notably lower.

Contextualizing the B200’s score against its nearest rivals further highlights its position. The B200 leads the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 3.2%, with the H200 scoring 334,891. It also outperforms the AMD Instinct MI300X by 8.6%, which posts 317,994, and the NVIDIA L40S by 16.8%, which scores 295,763. The only closer competitor is the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC, which beats the B200 by 6.6% with a score of 369,831. This shows the B200 is near the apex of current server accelerators, trailing only its immediate successor.

For the RTX A5500, the rival comparison reveals a much tighter competitive field. Its average benchmark score of 165,217 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, which scores 164,894 and trails by just 0.2%. Similarly, the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation scores 166,094, beating the A5500 by 0.5%. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB scores 162,504, which the A5500 leads by 1.7%, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X scores 168,574, surpassing the A5500 by 2%. The A5500 is thus a mid-pack performer within its workstation cohort, whereas the B200 is a top-tier outlier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA B200 achieves 345,482 points, which is 97.8% higher than the RTX A5500’s 174,637 points. The B200 also records a 100th percentile ranking, versus the A5500’s 97th percentile.

Q: How does the B200 compare to its closest rival, the NVIDIA H200 NVL?

A: The B200 scores 345,482, which is 3.2% ahead of the H200 NVL’s 334,891. This places the B200 as a clear, though not overwhelming, winner over the previous-generation server part in the same family.

Q: Is the RTX A5500 competitive with other workstation GPUs?

A: Yes, the data shows a tight cluster. The A5500’s average score of 165,217 is within 2% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation, and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X, indicating near-parity across these workstation offerings.

Q: What is the performance gap between the B200 and the RTX A5500?

A: In the OpenCL test, the B200 leads by 97.8%. In absolute terms, the B200’s score of 345,482 is roughly double the A5500’s 174,637, reflecting a fundamental difference in compute capacity.

Q: Does the RTX A5500 have any benchmark win over the B200?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark data, the B200 wins the only recorded test (Geekbench OpenCL). The RTX A5500 has zero wins in the comparison, though it does have a separate Vulkan score of 155,797 that the B200 lacks.

Q: How does the B200 fare against the fastest rival listed?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831, which is 6.6% higher than the B200’s 345,482. This makes the B300 the only listed accelerator to beat the B200.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA B200 is the clear choice for raw compute throughput. Its 97.8% lead over the RTX A5500 in OpenCL makes it suitable for workloads where every bit of floating-point or general-purpose performance matters, such as large-scale AI training, scientific simulations, or massive data processing. Its 100th percentile ranking reinforces that it is at the absolute frontier of GPU performance in the database, outclassing even the H200 NVL by 3.2% and the MI300X by 8.6%. If a workload is bottlenecked by compute, the B200’s score is the strongest available signal.

The RTX A5500 wins in versatility and practical integration. It features four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, enabling direct multi-monitor setups, whereas the B200 has no display outputs at all. The A5500 is a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin power connector and a dual-slot width, making it far easier to install in a standard workstation chassis compared to the B200’s SXM Module form factor, which requires a server platform. Additionally, the A5500’s 97th percentile ranking shows it is still a high-performing card, and its near-tie with the RTX 4500 Ada Generation (0.5% difference) means it remains relevant in the workstation segment.

For users with existing PCIe 4.0 infrastructure, the A5500’s PCIe 4.0 x16 interface is backward-compatible and sufficient for many tasks. The B200’s PCIe 5.0 x16 interface offers double the bandwidth, but only benefits those with newer server platforms that support PCIe 5.0. The A5500 also has a 230 W TDP, which is manageable with a 550 W suggested PSU, whereas the B200’s 1000 W TDP demands a 1400 W PSU and advanced cooling, further cementing the B200 as a data-center-only part.

Specification Differences

The most glaring difference is memory capacity and type. The B200 packs 90 GB of HBM3e across a 4096-bit bus, delivering 4.10 TB/s of bandwidth. The A5500 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, with 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a 3.75x capacity advantage and a 5.34x bandwidth advantage for the B200, directly enabling its superior compute performance.

The compute units also diverge sharply. The B200 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and just 24 ROPs, while the A5500 has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The B200’s higher shader count (85% more) fuels its FP32 throughput of 74.45 TFLOPS, versus the A5500’s 34.10 TFLOPS. Interestingly, the B200’s FP16 performance is listed as 1,191.2 TFLOPS with a 16:1 ratio, indicating a strong tensor core focus, while the A5500’s FP16 is identical to its FP32 at 34.10 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The B200 also has 592 tensor cores compared to the A5500’s 320, and the A5500 includes 80 RT cores, a feature the B200 does not list.

Clock speeds tell a reverse story. The A5500 has a higher base clock of 1080 MHz and a boost of 1665 MHz, versus the B200’s 700 MHz base and 1965 MHz boost. The B200’s lower base clock is offset by its massive core count, but the A5500’s higher sustained clock helps it achieve a pixel rate of 159.8 GPixel/s, which is over three times the B200’s 47.16 GPixel/s. The texture rate also differs: the B200 achieves 1,163.3 GTexel/s versus the A5500’s 532.8 GTexel/s, favoring the B200 by 2.18x.

Power and physical specifications further separate them. The B200 draws 1000 W TDP with a 1400 W suggested PSU, while the A5500 draws 230 W with a 550 W suggested PSU. The B200 is an SXM Module with no power connector listed, whereas the A5500 is a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin connector. The A5500 measures 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height, while the B200’s dimensions are not recorded.

Architecture Differences

The B200 is built on the Blackwell architecture with the GB100 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 104,000 million transistors, a staggering figure that reflects its server-class design. The A5500 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung, with 28,300 million transistors and a die size of 628 mm². The transistor density works out to 45.1M per mm² for the A5500, while the B200’s density is not listed.

The B200’s generation is listed as "Server Blackwell (Bxx)," while the A5500 is "Workstation Ampere (Ax000)." This naming convention underscores their intended markets: the B200 is a server accelerator with no display outputs, and the A5500 is a workstation card with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The B200 lacks any API support listings (DirectX, OpenGL, Vulkan), whereas the A5500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, confirming its role in graphics-intensive applications.

Memory technology is a fundamental architectural split. The B200 uses HBM3e, a high-bandwidth stacked memory designed for massive parallel data access, which is why it achieves 4.10 TB/s bandwidth. The A5500 uses GDDR6, a more traditional discrete memory type, which is cheaper and easier to integrate but limited to 768.0 GB/s. The bus width difference (4096-bit vs 384-bit) is a direct consequence of this choice.

Finally, the production status differs: the B200 is "Active," while the A5500 is "End-of-life." The A5500 was released on 2022-03-21, while the B200’s release date is not provided. Their predecessors and successors also reflect generational shifts: the B200 follows "Server Hopper" and precedes "Server Rubin," while the A5500 follows "Quadro Turing" and precedes "Workstation Ada." This places the B200 at the leading edge of server technology, and the A5500 as a mature, outgoing workstation product.