NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 6000D holds a commanding lead in raw compute. Its FP32 throughput of 97.04 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX 5090 SE's 66.94 TFLOPS, a 45% advantage. Texture rate tells the same story: 1,516.3 GTexel/s versus 1,045.9 GTexel/s, a 45% gap. Pixel throughput favors the RTX 6000D as well at 466.6 GPixel/s versus 380.3 GPixel/s, an approximate 23% margin.

The RTX 6000D's recorded benchmark data confirms this dominance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 3,522 points. Its Geekbench OpenCL score reaches 388,405. The database places the RTX 6000D in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 195,964. The RTX 5090 SE has no benchmark entries in the database, so no direct head-to-head scores exist. The specification comparison must stand in for that missing data.

The RTX 5090 SE counters in memory bandwidth per dollar of power draw, but only qualitatively. Its 1.34 TB/s bandwidth trails the RTX 6000D's 1.40 TB/s. The RTX 5090 SE's memory clock runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), while the RTX 6000D runs at 1560 MHz (25 Gbps effective). The RTX 6000D achieves higher total bandwidth through a wider 448-bit bus, versus 384-bit on the RTX 5090 SE.

Clock speed is one area where the RTX 5090 SE does not compete. The RTX 6000D boosts to 2430 MHz, while the RTX 5090 SE boosts to 2377 MHz. The base clocks differ more substantially: 1992 MHz for the RTX 6000D versus 1740 MHz for the RTX 5090 SE. Higher clocks on the RTX 6000D contribute to its compute lead, but the larger shading unit count (19,968 versus 14,080) matters more.

The RTX 6000D's nearest rivals in the database clarify its standing. It sits 0.8% above the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB, 4.7% above the A100 SXM4 40 GB, and 6.1% above the RTX 5000 Ada Generation. It trails the A100 PCIe 80 GB by 5.4%. These deltas place the RTX 6000D firmly among workstation-class accelerators, not consumer gaming cards.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7, while the RTX 5090 SE has 24 GB. That is a 60 GB difference, or 3.5 times the capacity.

Q: Do both cards use the same chip and architecture?

A: Yes. Both use the GB202 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. Both have 92,200 million transistors and a 750 mm² die size.

Q: Which card draws more power?

A: The RTX 6000D has a 600 W TDP and requires a 1000 W suggested PSU. The RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP and requires a 900 W suggested PSU.

Q: How do their memory buses compare?

A: The RTX 6000D uses a 448-bit bus, the RTX 5090 SE uses 384-bit. The RTX 6000D also achieves higher bandwidth at 1.40 TB/s versus 1.34 TB/s.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The RTX 6000D has 156 RT cores and 624 tensor cores. The RTX 5090 SE has 110 RT cores and 440 tensor cores.

Q: What are the display outputs on each?

A: The RTX 5090 SE has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The RTX 6000D has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b and no HDMI.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the GB202 chip, Blackwell 2.0 architecture, TSMC 5 nm process, 92,200 million transistors, and 750 mm² die size. Transistor density is identical at 122.9 million per mm². The fundamental architecture is the same; the differences come from how many units are enabled and how they are configured.

The RTX 6000D enables more silicon. It has 19,968 shading units, 624 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The RTX 5090 SE has 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, and 160 ROPs. The RTX 6000D also has 156 RT cores and 624 tensor cores, versus 110 and 440 on the RTX 5090 SE. This is a 42% higher shading unit count and a similar proportional increase across other functional blocks.

The memory subsystem differs in width and capacity. The RTX 6000D uses a 448-bit bus with 84 GB GDDR7. The RTX 5090 SE uses a 384-bit bus with 24 GB GDDR7. Both use GDDR7, but the RTX 6000D runs its memory at a lower effective speed: 25 Gbps versus 28 Gbps. The wider bus overcomes the lower speed, giving the RTX 6000D 1.40 TB/s versus 1.34 TB/s.

Both cards support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16. Both are dual-slot designs with a single 16-pin power connector. The physical dimensions differ slightly: the RTX 5090 SE is 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The RTX 6000D is 304 mm long, 137 mm tall, and the same 40 mm width.

The RTX 6000D is part of the GeForce 60-series and Blackwell PRO W generation. The RTX 5090 SE is part of the GeForce 50-series. Despite the naming, the RTX 6000D is the newer product in the database's classification, with a release date before the RTX 5090 SE. The RTX 6000D's predecessor is listed as Workstation Ada; the RTX 5090 SE's predecessor is GeForce 40. The RTX 5090 SE has a successor listed as GeForce 60, while the RTX 6000D has none.

Specification Differences

| Specification | RTX 5090 SE | RTX 6000D |

|---|---|---|

| Base clock | 1740 MHz | 1992 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2377 MHz | 2430 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) | 1560 MHz (25 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 24 GB | 84 GB |

| Memory bus width | 384 bit | 448 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 1.34 TB/s | 1.40 TB/s |

| Shading units | 14,080 | 19,968 |

| TMUs | 440 | 624 |

| ROPs | 160 | 192 |

| RT cores | 110 | 156 |

| Tensor cores | 440 | 624 |

| Pixel rate | 380.3 GPixel/s | 466.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 1,045.9 GTexel/s | 1,516.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 66.94 TFLOPS | 97.04 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1) | 97.04 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 500 W | 600 W |

| Suggested PSU | 900 W | 1000 W |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 304 mm (12 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 137 mm (5.4 inches) |

| Width | 40 mm (1.6 inches) | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Launch MSRP | 1,499 USD | 8,565 USD |

The Verdict

The data separates these two clearly. The RTX 6000D is the faster card by every compute metric in the database. It has 45% more FP32 throughput, 45% more texture rate, 23% more pixel rate, and more memory bandwidth. It also has 3.5 times the memory capacity, more RT cores, more tensor cores, and higher clocks.

The RTX 6000D's benchmark record supports this. Its 98th percentile standing and its position against Tesla and A100-class accelerators confirm it as a professional compute part. The 0.8% delta above the Tesla V100S and 4.7% above the A100 SXM4 place it in established workstation territory. The 5.4% deficit to the A100 PCIe 80 GB shows it does not lead every older accelerator, but it remains competitive.

The RTX 5090 SE has no benchmark scores in the database. Its 50th percentile and zero average score reflect missing data, not measured performance. What the database does show is a capable card with lower power draw, smaller physical footprint, and HDMI output support. Its 500 W TDP versus 600 W and 267 mm length versus 304 mm give it an installation advantage in constrained cases.

The RTX 6000D costs more at launch, but this analysis does not address value. The recorded data shows a faster, larger, more power-hungry card with workstation heritage. The RTX 5090 SE is a GeForce 50-series product with a consumer display output configuration and lower power requirements.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 6000D wins in every raw performance category the database records. FP32 compute, FP16 compute, texture rate, pixel rate, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, tensor cores, memory capacity, memory bus width, and memory bandwidth all favor the RTX 6000D. Workloads that scale with these resources, such as large model inference, rendering, and scientific computation, benefit from the RTX 6000D's configuration.

The RTX 5090 SE wins in power efficiency per unit of compute, but only in relative terms. It delivers 66.94 TFLOPS within a 500 W envelope, while the RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS within 600 W. The RTX 5090 SE's lower TDP and 900 W suggested PSU make it easier to integrate into existing systems. Its 267 mm length fits in more cases than the RTX 6000D's 304 mm length.

The RTX 5090 SE also wins on display flexibility. It includes an HDMI 2.1b output alongside three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The RTX 6000D offers four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs and no HDMI. For setups that require HDMI natively, the RTX 5090 SE avoids an adapter.

The RTX 6000D wins on memory capacity decisively. 84 GB versus 24 GB means the RTX 6000D can hold larger datasets, models, or textures in VRAM without spilling to system memory. The 448-bit bus and 1.40 TB/s bandwidth support that capacity. The RTX 5090 SE's 1.34 TB/s bandwidth is lower, and its 24 GB capacity is a fraction of the RTX 6000D's.

The RTX 6000D's clock advantage also matters. Its base clock of 1992 MHz and boost of 2430 MHz both exceed the RTX 5090 SE's 1740 MHz and 2377 MHz. Sustained workloads that run at base clocks see a 14% frequency lead for the RTX 6000D.

The RTX 5090 SE's release date follows the RTX 6000D in the database's timeline. The RTX 6000D released first, and the RTX 5090 SE came later. Both remain active in production. The RTX 5090 SE has a successor listed as GeForce 60; the RTX 6000D has none. This suggests the RTX 6000D occupies a terminal position in its product line, while the RTX 5090 SE is an intermediate step. The database does not contain performance data for the RTX 5090 SE, so its real-world standing against the RTX 6000D must be inferred from specifications alone.