NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A4000 wins decisively in every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. The GeForce GTX 780 Ti does not claim a single victory in the shared test suite. The A4000 leads by 287% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 368.6% in Geekbench Vulkan. These are not marginal advantages; they represent a generational chasm in raw compute throughput.

The RTX A4000 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 26683, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 780 Ti averages 24236, sitting at the 70th percentile. While the percentile gap looks small, the average score difference is 2447 points, and the head-to-head deltas reveal where the real separation lies. The A4000's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (0.5% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (1% behind), the AMD Radeon 860M (1.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (1.3% behind). The GTX 780 Ti, by contrast, trades blows with the GeForce GTX 1630 (0.2% ahead), the RTX 2080 SUPER (0.3% behind), the Radeon RX 6800S (0.7% behind), and the Radeon RX 6600 XT (0.8% ahead).

Use-case separation is clear. The A4000 is built for compute-heavy workloads. Its 6144 shading units, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores give it capabilities the GTX 780 Ti simply does not possess. The GTX 780 Ti has no RT cores and no tensor cores, so any workload involving ray tracing or AI acceleration is automatically out of its reach. The A4000 also has over five times the memory capacity (16 GB versus 3 GB), which makes it suitable for large datasets and multi-application workflows. The GTX 780 Ti remains relevant only in legacy DirectX 9 or OpenGL scenarios where its older architecture still executes, but even there the A4000's PassMark DirectX 9 score of 240 versus a comparable figure is not available for the 780 Ti, so no direct comparison can be drawn from the recorded data.

In short, the A4000 wins everywhere the two cards share a benchmark. The GTX 780 Ti wins nowhere in the head-to-head data.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A4000 uses the GA104 chip built on Samsung's 8 nm process. It packs 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per square millimeter. The GTX 780 Ti uses the GK110B chip fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It contains 7,080 million transistors across a 561 mm² die, giving a density of just 12.6 million per square millimeter. The A4000 is therefore denser by a factor of roughly 3.5 in transistor packing, while the 780 Ti's die is physically larger.

Clock behavior differs significantly. The A4000 runs at a 735 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost. The GTX 780 Ti runs higher at 875 MHz base and 928 MHz boost, but the architecture does far less work per cycle. The A4000's FP32 throughput is 19.17 TFLOPS versus 5.345 TFLOPS for the 780 Ti. The A4000 also sustains FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (19.17 TFLOPS), while the 780 Ti has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory architecture is another major split. The A4000 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 780 Ti uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, but only reaches 336.6 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the A4000 achieves 33% more bandwidth. The A4000's memory clock is listed at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, while the 780 Ti's memory clock is 1753 MHz with 7 Gbps effective. The doubled effective data rate explains the bandwidth advantage.

Feature support also diverges. The A4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 780 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The A4000 has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores; the 780 Ti has none. The A4000 outputs 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the 780 Ti offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The A4000 is a single-slot card with a 1x 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The 780 Ti is dual-slot with a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin and a 600 W suggested PSU. Power draw is 140 W for the A4000 versus 250 W for the 780 Ti.

The A4000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16; the 780 Ti uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The A4000 measures 241 mm in length, 112 mm in height; the 780 Ti measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width. The A4000 was released in 2021, the 780 Ti in 2013. The A4000's predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada. The 780 Ti's predecessor is GeForce 600 and its successor is GeForce 900.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the RTX A4000 is the superior card by every measurable metric in the database. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 287% and 368.6%. It has more memory, more bandwidth, more shading units, more texture units, double the ROPs, and a feature set that includes ray tracing and tensor acceleration. It also consumes less power (140 W versus 250 W) and requires a smaller PSU (300 W versus 600 W).

The GTX 780 Ti is not competitive in any recorded benchmark. Its only advantages are a higher base clock (875 MHz versus 735 MHz) and a wider memory bus (384 bit versus 256 bit), but neither translates into a performance win. Its higher clock does not compensate for the A4000's 3.6x FP32 throughput advantage. Its wider bus does not overcome the A4000's 33% bandwidth lead.

Who should pick the A4000? Anyone running compute-heavy workloads, modern DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, ray-traced applications, or AI inference. The 16 GB frame buffer and 48 RT cores make it suitable for professional 3D rendering, scientific compute, and machine learning tasks. The single-slot design and 140 W power draw also make it easier to integrate into dense workstation builds.

Who should pick the GTX 780 Ti? No one, based on the recorded data. It is end-of-life, its Vulkan support is older (1.2.175 versus 1.4), its memory capacity is 3 GB, and it has no RT or tensor cores. Even in legacy DirectX 10 or 11 workloads, the A4000's PassMark scores (126 for DirectX 10, 158 for DirectX 11, 72 for DirectX 12, 240 for DirectX 9) are the only recorded numbers available; the 780 Ti has no corresponding entries in the database. The 780 Ti's average score of 24236 places it near the GTX 1630 and RX 6600 XT, but those are not the A4000's competition. The A4000 sits with the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary and RTX 5060, a full tier higher.

The verdict is unambiguous: the RTX A4000 is the only rational choice from the data.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX A4000 than the GTX 780 Ti in OpenCL?

A: The A4000 scores 105739 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 27326 for the 780 Ti, a 287% advantage.

Q: Does the GTX 780 Ti support ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 780 Ti has no RT cores, while the RTX A4000 has 48 RT cores.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX A4000 delivers 448.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 bus. The GTX 780 Ti delivers 336.6 GB/s over a 384-bit GDDR5 bus.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: Both are end-of-life. The RTX A4000 was released in 2021, the GTX 780 Ti in 2013.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX A4000 has a 140 W TDP and a suggested 300 W PSU. The GTX 780 Ti has a 250 W TDP and a suggested 600 W PSU.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX A4000 has 6144 shading units. The GTX 780 Ti has 2880.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmarks between these cards. Both are one-sided.

Geekbench OpenCL: the RTX A4000 scores 105739, the GTX 780 Ti scores 27326. The A4000 wins by 287%. This test measures general-purpose compute through the OpenCL API. The A4000's 6144 shaders, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, combined with 16 GB of GDDR6, produce nearly four times the raw throughput. The 780 Ti's 2880 shaders and 3 GB of GDDR5 cannot keep pace. The 287% delta is consistent with the FP32 specification gap: 19.17 TFLOPS versus 5.345 TFLOPS, a ratio of 3.59.

Geekbench Vulkan: the RTX A4000 scores 127645, the GTX 780 Ti scores 27238. The A4000 wins by 368.6%. The Vulkan delta is even larger than OpenCL. This likely reflects the A4000's newer architecture, its Vulkan 1.4 support versus the 780 Ti's Vulkan 1.2.175, and its higher memory bandwidth. The 780 Ti's 336.6 GB/s becomes a bottleneck under modern API workloads, while the A4000's 448.0 GB/s provides more headroom.

Outside the shared tests, the A4000 has additional benchmark entries: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (2604), PassMark DirectX 10 (126), DirectX 11 (158), DirectX 12 (72), DirectX 9 (240), G2D (1024), G3D (19459), and GPU Compute (9760). The GTX 780 Ti has one unique test: Geekbench Metal, scoring 18144. There is no direct comparison for these tests, but the A4000's average benchmark score of 26683 versus the 780 Ti's 24236 reinforces the overall picture.

The largest win for the A4000 is Vulkan at 368.6%. The smallest recorded win is OpenCL at 287%. There are no benchmark categories where the 780 Ti leads. The percentile rankings (72nd for the A4000, 70th for the 780 Ti) understate the gap because the 780 Ti's average is buoyed by its Metal score, which has no A4000 counterpart. The head-to-head results are the more reliable comparison, and they are unanimous.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards in the database:

• Chip: GA104 (A4000) versus GK110B (780 Ti)
• Architecture: Ampere versus Kepler
• Generation: Workstation Ampere (Ax000) versus GeForce 700
• Process node: 8 nm Samsung versus 28 nm TSMC
• Transistors: 17,400 million versus 7,080 million
• Die size: 392 mm² versus 561 mm²
• Transistor density: 44.4M / mm² versus 12.6M / mm²
• Base clock: 735 MHz versus 875 MHz
• Boost clock: 1560 MHz versus 928 MHz
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 16 GB versus 3 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Memory bus width: 256 bit versus 384 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 448.0 GB/s versus 336.6 GB/s
• Shading units: 6144 versus 2880
• TMUs: 192 versus 240
• ROPs: 96 versus 48
• RT cores: 48 versus none
• Tensor cores: 192 versus none
• Pixel rate: 149.8 GPixel/s versus 55.68 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 299.5 GTexel/s versus 222.7 GTexel/s
• FP32: 19.17 TFLOPS versus 5.345 TFLOPS
• FP16: 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) versus none recorded
• TDP: 140 W versus 250 W
• Slot width: Single-slot versus dual-slot
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 600 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.2.175
• Length: 241 mm versus 267 mm
• Width: not recorded versus 38 mm
• Release date: 2021-04-11 versus 2013-11-06
• Predecessor: Quadro Turing versus GeForce 600
• Successor: Workstation Ada versus GeForce 900
• Launch MSRP: none recorded versus 699 USD (stated once as launch MSRP, no further comment)

The GTX 780 Ti has one specification advantage: more TMUs (240 versus 192) and a wider memory bus (384 bit versus 256 bit). It also has a higher base clock. None of these translate into a benchmark win. The A4000 leads in every performance-relevant metric that matters for modern workloads.