NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE vs NVIDIA L4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE and the NVIDIA L4. The RTX 5090 SE has no recorded benchmark scores, while the L4 has two: Geekbench OpenCL at 140,838 and Geekbench Vulkan at 121,306. The L4's average benchmark score is 131,072, placing it in the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti (average score 131,938, delta -0.7%), the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218, delta -3.1%), the NVIDIA A10M (135,230, delta -3.1%), and the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396, delta -3.2%). These deltas show the L4 sits within a tight cluster, trailing the RTX 3090 Ti by less than 1% and the others by roughly 3%. Without recorded scores for the RTX 5090 SE, no direct numerical comparison can be made. The data gap means any performance relationship between these two cards remains unquantified in the database.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the NVIDIA L4?

A: The L4 has an average benchmark score of 131,072, based on Geekbench OpenCL (140,838) and Geekbench Vulkan (121,306) results.

Q: How does the L4 compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti?

A: The L4's average score of 131,072 is 0.7% lower than the RTX 3090 Ti's average score of 131,938.

Q: Does the RTX 5090 SE have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the RTX 5090 SE has an empty benchmarks array, meaning the database contains no performance measurements for this card.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of the L4 among all GPUs?

A: The L4 sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database, indicating its recorded scores place it above most other entries.

Q: What is the RTX 5090 SE's percentile ranking?

A: The RTX 5090 SE is in the 50th percentile, but with no benchmark scores recorded, this ranking reflects an absence of data rather than measured performance.

Q: Are there any head-to-head benchmark results between these two cards?

A: No, the head-to-head benchmarks array is empty, so the database offers no direct comparison data.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 5090 SE uses the GB202 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, while the L4 uses the AD104 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the transistor counts differ substantially: the RTX 5090 SE packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, giving a density of 122.9 million transistors per mm². The L4 contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8 million per mm². The density figures are close, but the RTX 5090 SE's die is more than twice as large. The RTX 5090 SE is part of the GeForce 50-series generation, succeeding the GeForce 40 series and preceding the GeForce 60 series. The L4 belongs to the Server Ada generation, succeeding Server Ampere and preceding Server Hopper. The RTX 5090 SE is a consumer-oriented card, while the L4 is positioned for server workloads. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility does not separate them. The RTX 5090 SE's Blackwell 2.0 architecture introduces a newer design lineage compared to the Ada Lovelace architecture in the L4. The RTX 5090 SE has 110 RT cores and 440 tensor cores, while the L4 has 60 RT cores and 240 tensor cores, indicating a 1.83x difference in both ray tracing and tensor hardware. The shading units also differ: 14,080 for the RTX 5090 SE versus 7,424 for the L4, a 1.9x ratio. Texture mapping units number 440 against 240, and ROPs stand at 160 against 80. These architectural differences point to the RTX 5090 SE carrying roughly double the compute resources of the L4 across most processing units, though the L4's lower power envelope suggests a different design priority.

Specification Differences

The RTX 5090 SE and L4 diverge across nearly every specification field. The RTX 5090 SE has a base clock of 1740 MHz and a boost clock of 2377 MHz, while the L4 has a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 2040 MHz. Memory configurations differ: the RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 with a 384-bit bus and 1.34 TB/s bandwidth, while the L4 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 300.1 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5090 SE versus 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) for the L4. Compute rates show the RTX 5090 SE delivering 66.94 TFLOPS FP32 and 66.94 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while the L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 30.29 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). Pixel rate is 380.3 GPixel/s for the RTX 5090 SE versus 163.2 GPixel/s for the L4. Texture rate is 1,045.9 GTexel/s against 489.6 GTexel/s. Power consumption differs dramatically: the RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP and requires a 900 W suggested PSU with a 16-pin connector, while the L4 has a 72 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU with no power connectors. The RTX 5090 SE is dual-slot, the L4 is single-slot. The RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16, the L4 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: the RTX 5090 SE has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the L4 has no outputs. Dimensions: the RTX 5090 SE measures 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm, the L4 measures 169 mm by 56 mm with no width recorded. The RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD; the L4 has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates also differ, with the RTX 5090 SE released later than the L4.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 SE wins on raw throughput in every compute metric recorded. Its FP32 of 66.94 TFLOPS is 2.21x the L4's 30.29 TFLOPS. Texture rate of 1,045.9 GTexel/s is 2.14x the L4's 489.6 GTexel/s. Pixel rate of 380.3 GPixel/s is 2.33x the L4's 163.2 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth of 1.34 TB/s is 4.47x the L4's 300.1 GB/s. The RTX 5090 SE also carries more than double the shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, and tensor cores. It supports PCIe 5.0 versus PCIe 4.0, offers display outputs where the L4 has none, and uses newer GDDR7 memory. The L4 wins on power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 72 W TDP is dramatically lower than the RTX 5090 SE's 500 W, and its suggested PSU of 250 W versus 900 W indicates a far lighter system requirement. The L4 is single-slot at 169 mm length, while the RTX 5090 SE is dual-slot at 267 mm. The L4 requires no power connectors, simplifying installation in constrained environments. The L4 also has recorded benchmark scores, placing it in the 95th percentile, while the RTX 5090 SE has no recorded scores at all. For server deployments where density, cooling, and power budgets dominate, the L4's design wins. For workloads demanding maximum compute, memory bandwidth, and rendering capabilities, the RTX 5090 SE's specifications dominate on paper.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split. The RTX 5090 SE is built for maximum performance, with 2.21x the FP32 throughput, 4.47x the memory bandwidth, and more than double the core counts of the L4. Its 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus delivers 1.34 TB/s, suitable for large datasets and high-resolution rendering. The L4 is built for efficiency, with a 72 W TDP, no power connectors, single-slot dimensions, and a 250 W suggested PSU. Its 24 GB of GDDR6 provides 300.1 GB/s, lower but sufficient for inference or virtualization workloads where power density matters. The L4's recorded benchmark scores at the 95th percentile confirm it performs well within its class, while the RTX 5090 SE's lack of recorded scores leaves its measured performance unverified. The RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD; the L4 has no recorded launch MSRP. For users prioritizing compute density and rendering capability, the RTX 5090 SE's specifications indicate it should dominate. For users prioritizing power efficiency, physical space, and server integration, the L4's specifications make it the practical choice. The RTX 5090 SE belongs in workstations or gaming rigs with robust power delivery. The L4 belongs in server racks where 500 W cards cannot fit. The database cannot confirm actual performance for the RTX 5090 SE, so any verdict relies solely on its architectural and specification advantages. The L4's measured scores provide concrete evidence of its standing, while the RTX 5090 SE's 50th percentile ranking with zero benchmarks reflects an incomplete record. The choice between these two cards depends entirely on whether the workload values raw throughput or operational efficiency.