NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark runs between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. The RTX 5090 SE has no recorded benchmark scores, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has two recorded results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 124,812, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 109,364, producing an average benchmark score of 117,088.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GB10, which scores 117,393 on average, a negligible 0.3% difference. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 scores 118,976, placing it 1.6% ahead of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB trails by 2.4% with an average score of 114,395, while the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile is 2.8% behind at 113,944.

Because the RTX 5090 SE lacks recorded scores, its percentile ranking is 50, with an average benchmark score of zero. This means the data cannot substantiate a performance comparison through measured results. The specification sheet, however, shows a large theoretical gap in raw compute. The RTX 5090 SE delivers 66.94 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS. That places the RTX 5090 SE at roughly 3.5 times the FP32 rate of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, though this figure derives from clock and core counts rather than benchmark runs.

Pixel and texture throughput tell a similar story. The RTX 5090 SE reaches 380.3 GPixel/s and 1,045.9 GTexel/s, versus 99.84 GPixel/s and 299.5 GTexel/s for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. Memory bandwidth differs by a factor of nearly five: 1.34 TB/s against 280.0 GB/s. The RTX 5090 SE also carries more memory, 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus, compared to 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 5090 SE is rated for 66.94 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 19.17 TFLOPS for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus with 1.34 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W and requires a 900 W suggested PSU with a single 16-pin connector. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a 70 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU, with no power connector listed.

Q: What is the physical size difference?

A: The RTX 5090 SE measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 168 mm long and 69 mm high, with no width listed.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation ranks at the 95th percentile among all GPUs. The RTX 5090 SE has a percentile ranking of 50, based on no recorded benchmark scores.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The RTX 5090 SE offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures and die generations. The RTX 5090 SE uses the GB202 chip built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, also fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. Both architectures support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The GB202 die contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, producing a transistor density of 122.9 million per mm². The AD104 die contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8 million per mm². The density gap is small, but the absolute scale is very different: the RTX 5090 SE packs roughly 2.6 times the transistors of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation.

Core configuration differs in every category. The RTX 5090 SE has 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, 160 ROPs, 110 RT cores, and 440 tensor cores. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. The RTX 5090 SE more than doubles the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, while its RT core count is more than double and its tensor core count is more than double as well.

Memory technology also separates the two. The RTX 5090 SE uses GDDR7 with an effective data rate of 28 Gbps, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses GDDR6 running at 14 Gbps effective. The bus widths are 384-bit versus 160-bit, which explains the bandwidth disparity. The RTX 5090 SE's memory clock is listed at 1750 MHz, same as the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation's 1750 MHz figure, but the effective data rate doubles because of the newer memory type.

Interconnect and power delivery differ. The RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RTX 5090 SE requires a 16-pin power connector and lists a suggested PSU of 900 W. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation lists no power connector and suggests a 250 W PSU.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows a clear split in clock speeds. The RTX 5090 SE has a base clock of 1740 MHz and a boost clock of 2377 MHz. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz. Both are built on the same 5 nm TSMC process, but the RTX 5090 SE runs at much higher frequencies.

Memory specifications differ across the board. The RTX 5090 SE carries 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus with 1.34 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation carries 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 SE has a memory clock of 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective data rate, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a memory clock of 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective data rate.

Compute resources are substantially higher on the RTX 5090 SE. Its 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, 160 ROPs, 110 RT cores, and 440 tensor cores compare to 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores on the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. Pixel rate is 380.3 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 throughput are both 66.94 TFLOPS on the RTX 5090 SE, compared to 19.17 TFLOPS on the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation.

Power and physical specs diverge sharply. The RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP, a suggested PSU of 900 W, one 16-pin connector, and dimensions of 267 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a 70 W TDP, a suggested PSU of 250 W, no power connector, and dimensions of 168 mm by 69 mm with no width listed. Both are dual-slot cards.

Display outputs differ. The RTX 5090 SE provides 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Bus interface also differs: PCIe 5.0 x16 on the RTX 5090 SE, PCIe 4.0 x16 on the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation.

Release timing is not directly comparable in the data. The RTX 5090 SE has a release date of 2025-12-31, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a release date of 2023-03-20. The RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has no launch MSRP recorded.

The Verdict

The recorded data cannot support a benchmark-based verdict between these two cards, because the RTX 5090 SE has no benchmark scores in the database. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, however, has solid measured results: a 95th percentile ranking, an average score of 117,088, and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 124,812. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GB10, is within 0.3%, indicating that the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation performs at the top tier of the database.

The specification sheet tells a different story. The RTX 5090 SE delivers more than triple the FP32 throughput, nearly four times the pixel rate, more than triple the texture rate, and nearly five times the memory bandwidth. It also has almost double the memory capacity and a much larger transistor budget. These numbers indicate a far more powerful GPU in raw terms, but the lack of measured scores means the database cannot confirm real-world behavior.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the only card with verified performance data. For any workload where benchmark results matter, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the validated choice. The RTX 5090 SE remains an unmeasured product in the database, despite its much higher theoretical specifications.

Power and physical requirements also favor the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. Its 70 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU fit into systems where the RTX 5090 SE's 500 W TDP and 900 W suggested PSU would be impractical. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is also shorter and narrower, at 168 mm by 69 mm, versus 267 mm by 111 mm for the RTX 5090 SE.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in every category backed by measured data. It holds the 95th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the RTX 5090 SE sits at the 50th percentile with zero recorded scores. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation also wins on power efficiency: 19.17 TFLOPS from a 70 W TDP, compared to the RTX 5090 SE's 66.94 TFLOPS from a 500 W TDP. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation requires no power connector and only a 250 W suggested PSU, making it suitable for small form factor builds.

The RTX 5090 SE wins on every raw specification in the database. It has more shading units (14,080 versus 6,144), more TMUs (440 versus 192), more ROPs (160 versus 64), more RT cores (110 versus 48), and more tensor cores (440 versus 192). Its clocks are higher: 2377 MHz boost versus 1560 MHz boost. Its memory subsystem is faster: 1.34 TB/s versus 280.0 GB/s, with 24 GB versus 20 GB. Its FP32 throughput is 66.94 TFLOPS versus 19.17 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate is 380.3 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s. Its texture rate is 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s.

The RTX 5090 SE also wins on modern connectivity. It uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs favor the RTX 5090 SE with HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1b, versus the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation's mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connections.

For users who need verified performance, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the only card with data to back it up. For users who require maximum compute, memory bandwidth, and modern display output, the RTX 5090 SE is the stronger specification, though its actual performance remains unmeasured in the database.