NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive outcome in this comparison. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile wins both recorded head-to-head tests, leaving the GeForce GTX TITAN Z without a single victory in the comparative suite. The margin of victory is substantial in both cases, indicating a generational leap rather than an incremental improvement.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A4000 Mobile scores 97,178 points against the GTX TITAN Z's 25,465 points. This represents a delta of -73.8% from the perspective of the older card, meaning the RTX A4000 Mobile outperforms the GTX TITAN Z by nearly four times in raw compute workloads measured through OpenCL. The absolute difference of 71,713 points is one of the larger gaps observed in the database for comparable professional-class GPUs.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story. The RTX A4000 Mobile records 73,002 points, while the GTX TITAN Z manages 22,006 points. The delta here is -69.9%, again favoring the newer Ampere-based mobile workstation GPU. This narrower relative gap compared to OpenCL suggests that the RTX A4000 Mobile's advantage persists across different API paradigms, though Vulkan scaling slightly reduces the margin. Still, the RTX A4000 Mobile delivers more than triple the Vulkan performance of the GTX TITAN Z.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the GTX TITAN Z actually holds a higher aggregate figure of 23,736 points compared to the RTX A4000 Mobile's 21,379 points. This apparent contradiction requires careful interpretation. The GTX TITAN Z's average is computed from only two benchmark entries (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the RTX A4000 Mobile's average includes nine tests, several of which are Passmark legacy DirectX tests that score extremely low. For instance, the RTX A4000 Mobile scores just 66 in Passmark DirectX 12, 105 in DirectX 10, and 127 in DirectX 11. These legacy API benchmarks, while informative for compatibility testing, drag down the mobile card's aggregate average despite its overwhelming superiority in modern compute workloads.

In the OpenCL test specifically, the RTX A4000 Mobile sits in a completely different performance tier. The GTX TITAN Z's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile at 23,628 points (a 0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 9070 at 23,877 points (-0.6%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile at 23,518 points (0.9%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6800S at 24,063 points (-1.4%). The GTX TITAN Z's average of 23,736 places it squarely in this cluster, roughly 0.5% above the RTX 3080 Mobile and about 1.4% below the RX 6800S. These are tight margins, suggesting the GTX TITAN Z performs competitively with mid-to-high-end modern laptop GPUs of that class.

The RTX A4000 Mobile, by contrast, has nearest rivals clustered around its 21,379 average: the AMD Radeon HD 8970M at 21,237 points (0.7%), the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL at 21,153 points (1.1%), the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 at 21,629 points (-1.2%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 at 21,035 points (1.6%). These deltas are all within 1.6%, indicating the A4000 Mobile's aggregate average aligns with a broader range of older and newer GPUs when legacy Passmark scores are included.

The percentile rankings are close: the GTX TITAN Z sits at the 69th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RTX A4000 Mobile is at the 66th percentile. The older card's slightly higher percentile stems from its limited benchmark footprint that only includes modern compute tests, whereas the mobile card's Passmark legacy scores penalize its standing. This is a case where the percentile metric does not fully reflect the head-to-head dominance shown in the OpenCL and Vulkan comparisons.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile as the superior GPU in every direct comparison available. The OpenCL advantage of 73.8% and the Vulkan advantage of 69.9% are not marginal differences; they represent a complete generational overhaul in compute capability. The GTX TITAN Z, despite its 69th percentile ranking and higher average score across its two benchmarks, cannot compete with the RTX A4000 Mobile in modern compute workloads.

The GTX TITAN Z is a Kepler architecture card from the GeForce 700 generation, released in May 2014. Its 5.046 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth were impressive for its era, but the RTX A4000 Mobile delivers 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 and 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The newer card also brings 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Kepler-based GTX TITAN Z.

The RTX A4000 Mobile also achieves this performance at a dramatically lower power envelope. The GTX TITAN Z has a TDP of 375 W and requires a 750 W power supply with two 8-pin connectors, occupying a triple-slot form factor. The RTX A4000 Mobile, by contrast, has a 115 W TDP with no external power connectors required, making it suitable for mobile workstations. The efficiency difference is stark and directly reflected in the benchmark results.

For users selecting between these two, the choice is clear from the data. The RTX A4000 Mobile is the appropriate pick for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads. The GTX TITAN Z retains a small aggregate score advantage only because of its limited benchmark dataset, not because of any real performance superiority in the tests that matter most.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX TITAN Z achieves zero wins in the head-to-head benchmark suite. Every direct comparison favors the RTX A4000 Mobile. The only area where the GTX TITAN Z appears stronger is in the aggregate average benchmark score, but this is a statistical artifact of test selection rather than a genuine performance advantage.

The RTX A4000 Mobile wins decisively in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 97,178 point score reflects the massive FP32 throughput advantage, with 17.20 TFLOPS against the GTX TITAN Z's 5.046 TFLOPS. The newer card also benefits from a 1:1 FP16 ratio at 17.20 TFLOPS, a capability the Kepler card does not expose in its specifications.

In Vulkan rendering, the RTX A4000 Mobile again dominates with 73,002 points versus 22,006 points. The Ampere architecture's support for Vulkan 1.4, compared to the GTX TITAN Z's Vulkan 1.2.175, may contribute to this advantage, along with the higher shading unit count of 5,120 versus 2,880.

The RTX A4000 Mobile also wins on memory technology and capacity. It offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX TITAN Z counters with 6 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus but only reaches 336.0 GB/s. The newer card's higher bandwidth and larger capacity make it better suited to modern workloads that demand both.

Power efficiency is another clear win for the RTX A4000 Mobile. The 375 W TDP of the GTX TITAN Z versus the 115 W TDP of the RTX A4000 Mobile means the newer card delivers over three times the FP32 throughput while consuming less than a third of the power. This is the kind of generational efficiency gain that defines the transition from 28 nm TSMC fabrication to 8 nm Samsung manufacturing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z has a higher average benchmark score of 23,736 points compared to the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile's 21,379 points. However, this is because the GTX TITAN Z's average is based on only two modern compute tests, while the RTX A4000 Mobile's average includes nine tests with several low-scoring legacy Passmark DirectX benchmarks.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A4000 Mobile in OpenCL performance?

A: The RTX A4000 Mobile scores 97,178 points in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 73.8% higher than the GTX TITAN Z's 25,465 points. The delta percentage is calculated from the GTX TITAN Z's perspective, showing a -73.8% deficit for the older card.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between these two GPUs?

A: The RTX A4000 Mobile delivers 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GTX TITAN Z provides 5.046 TFLOPS. The RTX A4000 Mobile also offers FP16 performance of 17.20 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, a feature not specified for the GTX TITAN Z.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: No. The RTX A4000 Mobile includes 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores as part of its Ampere architecture. The GTX TITAN Z, based on the Kepler architecture with the GK110B chip, has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX A4000 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX TITAN Z has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The newer card offers both more capacity and higher bandwidth despite the narrower bus.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX TITAN Z has a TDP of 375 W, requires a 750 W suggested power supply, and uses two 8-pin power connectors. The RTX A4000 Mobile has a TDP of 115 W and requires no external power connectors, reflecting its mobile design.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs spans nearly a decade of NVIDIA design evolution. The GTX TITAN Z uses the GK110B chip built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, featuring 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die. The transistor density is 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX A4000 Mobile employs the GA104 chip fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process, packing 17,400 million transistors into a 392 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 44.4 million per square millimeter, roughly 3.5 times denser than the older chip.

The Kepler architecture of the GTX TITAN Z represents NVIDIA's 2014-era design philosophy, with 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operation pipelines. Its pixel rate is 52.56 GPixel/s and texture rate is 210.2 GTexel/s. The Ampere architecture of the RTX A4000 Mobile increases the shading units to 5,120, reduces TMUs to 160, and raises ROPs to 80. Its pixel rate jumps to 134.4 GPixel/s and texture rate to 268.8 GTexel/s.

The RTX A4000 Mobile introduces hardware features that did not exist in the Kepler generation. The 40 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads, while the 160 tensor cores accelerate AI and deep learning inference. These additions, combined with the higher shading unit count, explain the massive compute advantage in OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The GTX TITAN Z uses GDDR5 with a 384-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX A4000 Mobile uses GDDR6 with a narrower 256-bit bus but achieves higher bandwidth at 384.0 GB/s. The newer card's memory operates at 12 Gbps effective, compared to the older card's 7 Gbps effective. The GTX TITAN Z's 6 GB capacity is smaller than the RTX A4000 Mobile's 8 GB.

The bus interface also reflects the generational gap. The GTX TITAN Z connects via PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX A4000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the available bandwidth to the host system. API support differs as well: the RTX A4000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX TITAN Z is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs with the newer card at version 1.4 versus the older card's 1.2.175.

Physical design could hardly be more different. The GTX TITAN Z is a triple-slot, 267 mm long card that is 62 mm wide, requiring substantial chassis space and a 750 W power supply. The RTX A4000 Mobile has no listed dimensions, no slot width, and no external power connectors, being designed for integration into portable workstations. The GTX TITAN Z offers fixed display outputs including two DVI ports, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2, while the RTX A4000 Mobile's display outputs are described as portable device dependent.

The production status of both cards is end-of-life. The GTX TITAN Z was released in May 2014 with a launch MSRP of 2,999 USD, succeeding the GeForce 600 series and preceding the GeForce 900 series. The RTX A4000 Mobile launched in April 2021, following the Quadro Turing-M generation and preceding the Ada-MW lineup. The 8 nm Ampere chip with its 44.4M transistors per mm² density, 1:1 FP16 ratio, and dedicated RT and tensor cores represents a fundamentally different computing paradigm from the 28 nm Kepler chip's pure rasterization focus. The benchmark results quantify this difference: 73.8% in OpenCL and 69.9% in Vulkan, both favoring the newer architecture.