NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Comparison

The GeForce RTX 3090 and RTX A4000 are both Ampere-generation NVIDIA parts, but they target different corners of the market. The RTX 3090 is a flagship consumer card built for maximum throughput, while the RTX A4000 is a workstation card designed for efficiency and a compact footprint. Across ten head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the RTX 3090 takes nine wins, but the data shows one surprising reversal that defines their respective strengths.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the GeForce RTX 3090 comes in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scores 5118 against the A4000’s 2604. That is a 96.5% advantage, nearly double the performance. This result underscores the raw rendering horsepower of the GA102 chip; the RTX 3090’s shading units, texture mapping units, and render output units all vastly outnumber the A4000’s, and the benchmark results confirm it.

The compute-oriented benchmarks also heavily favor the RTX 3090. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3090 posts 172758 versus 105739 for the A4000, a 63.4% lead. The PassMark GPU Compute test shows a similar story: 15356 for the RTX 3090 against 9760 for the A4000, a 57.3% gap. These results align with the FP32 performance figures, where the RTX 3090 delivers 35.58 TFLOPS versus the A4000’s 19.17 TFLOPS. The RTX 3090’s 10496 shading units and 328 tensor cores simply dwarf the A4000’s 6144 shading units and 192 tensor cores.

In DirectX API tests, the RTX 3090’s lead is consistent but varies in magnitude. PassMark DirectX 12 shows a 52.8% advantage (110 vs 72), while DirectX 11 shows a 39.2% edge (220 vs 158). DirectX 10 is closer at 44.4% (182 vs 126), and DirectX 9 shows the smallest gap at 11.7% (268 vs 240). Even in the 2D test, the RTX 3090 wins, though marginally: PassMark G2D scores 1063 versus 1024, a 3.8% difference. The PassMark G3D test gives the RTX 3090 a 36.9% win (26645 vs 19459).

The single benchmark where the RTX A4000 wins is Geekbench Vulkan. Here, the A4000 scores 127645, while the RTX 3090 manages only 53927. That is a 57.8% deficit for the RTX 3090, meaning the A4000 is more than twice as fast in this specific workload. This is a striking outlier, especially given that the A4000 has fewer cores and lower clock speeds; the result suggests the A4000’s driver stack or architectural tuning gives it a unique advantage in Vulkan compute or rendering paths.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for most workloads: the GeForce RTX 3090 is the superior performer. It wins nine of ten benchmarks, with leads ranging from 3.8% in G2D to 96.5% in 3DMark Steel Nomad. If the task involves DirectX rendering, OpenCL compute, or general 3D acceleration, the RTX 3090 is the pick. Its average benchmark score of 27565 places it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals — the RTX 4070 Mobile and RX 6700 XT — are essentially tied with it, at 0.5% deltas. The A4000, with an average score of 26683, sits in the 72nd percentile, meaning the two cards are statistically close in overall average performance despite the RTX 3090’s dominance in most individual tests.

However, the Vulkan result flips the script. If the target application relies heavily on Vulkan, the A4000’s 127645 score is decisive. The A4000’s nearest rivals include the RTX 5060 and RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, with deltas around 1%, indicating that its overall performance class is lower than the RTX 3090’s, but the Vulkan outlier suggests a specialized role. For a user prioritizing Vulkan workloads, the A4000 is the clear choice; for everything else, the RTX 3090 wins.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the Ampere architecture and use Samsung’s 8 nm process, but they are fundamentally different chips. The RTX 3090 uses the GA102 die, which contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² footprint. The A4000 uses the smaller GA104 die, with 17,400 million transistors on 392 mm². The transistor density is nearly identical — 45.1M / mm² for the RTX 3090 versus 44.4M / mm² for the A4000 — which confirms that the performance gap comes from die size and core count, not process efficiency.

The RTX 3090’s GA102 houses 10496 shading units, 328 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 82 RT cores, and 328 tensor cores. The A4000’s GA104 is cut down to 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. This means the RTX 3090 has roughly 70% more shading units and tensor cores, and 71% more RT cores. The memory subsystems also differ: the RTX 3090 uses 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, while the A4000 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The RTX 3090’s memory bandwidth of 936.2 GB/s is more than double the A4000’s 448.0 GB/s.

Clock speeds are a notable divergence. The RTX 3090 has a base clock of 1395 MHz and a boost clock of 1695 MHz. The A4000 has a much lower base clock of 735 MHz but boosts to 1560 MHz. The A4000’s lower base clock likely reflects a power-saving design, while the boost clock is closer to the RTX 3090’s. The memory clocks also differ: the RTX 3090 runs at 19.5 Gbps effective, while the A4000 runs at 14 Gbps effective.

The RTX 3090 supports the same API set as the A4000 — DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 — so the Vulkan performance gap is not due to API version differences. The RTX 3090’s pixel rate is 189.8 GPixel/s versus 149.8 GPixel/s for the A4000, and its texture rate is 556.0 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s.

Specification Differences

The physical and power profiles are starkly different. The RTX 3090 has a TDP of 350 W and requires a 750 W power supply, while the A4000 has a TDP of 140 W and needs only a 300 W PSU. The RTX 3090 is a triple-slot card with a 1x 12-pin power connector, measuring 336 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width. The A4000 is a single-slot card with a 1x 6-pin connector, measuring 241 mm by 112 mm, with no width specification listed. The A4000’s smaller footprint and lower power draw make it far easier to install in dense workstation chassis.

Display outputs differ as well. The RTX 3090 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the A4000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The A4000’s four DisplayPort outputs are typical for workstation multi-monitor setups, while the RTX 3090’s HDMI 2.1 supports high-bandwidth consumer displays. The RTX 3090 launched with a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD; the A4000 has no launch MSRP listed.

The release dates are separated by roughly seven months: the RTX 3090 launched on 2020-08-31, and the A4000 on 2021-04-11. The RTX 3090’s predecessor is the GeForce 20 series and its successor is the GeForce 40 series. The A4000’s predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada. Both cards are marked as end-of-life in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The GeForce RTX 3090. It delivers 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 versus the RTX A4000’s 19.17 TFLOPS, and it wins the OpenCL benchmark by 63.4%.

Q: Is the RTX A4000 better in any benchmark?

A: Yes. The RTX A4000 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 127645, while the RTX 3090 scores 53927, a 57.8% deficit.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RTX 3090 has an average benchmark score of 27565, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs. The RTX A4000 has an average score of 26683, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Q: What are the memory differences?

A: The RTX 3090 has 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 936.2 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A4000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card fits in a smaller chassis?

A: The RTX A4000 is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm by 112 mm, while the RTX 3090 is a triple-slot card measuring 336 mm by 140 mm by 61 mm. The A4000 is also significantly less power-hungry, with a 140 W TDP versus 350 W.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vulkan performance difference is not due to API version support.