NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

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

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 records an average benchmark score of 79,842, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation records 135,218. Note that the RTX 5090's average includes a wider set of tests, including PassMark DirectX and compute workloads, whereas the RTX 4000 Ada only has Geekbench entries.

Q: What is the performance difference in the shared Geekbench tests?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370 versus 146,593 for the RTX 4000 Ada, a 56.2% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 5090 scores 376,728 versus 123,842, a 67.1% lead. Both head-to-head wins go to the RTX 5090.

Q: How does the RTX 4000 Ada compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada's average score of 135,218 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA A10M (135,230, 0% delta), slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396, -0.1%), and ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (135,774, -0.4%) and AMD Radeon PRO V620 (136,472, -0.9%). Its percentile rank is 95 among all GPUs.

Q: What is the RTX 5090's percentile rank and closest rival?

A: The RTX 5090 ranks at the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605 average, 0.3% delta), followed by the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396, 0.6%) and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940, 1.1%).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX 5090 boosts to 2407 MHz, while the RTX 4000 Ada boosts to 2175 MHz. The base clocks are 2017 MHz and 1500 MHz, respectively.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to different NVIDIA architectures. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is built on Ada Lovelace, using the AD104 chip, while the RTX 5090 uses Blackwell 2.0 with the GB202 chip. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, but the transistor counts diverge sharply: the RTX 4000 Ada packs 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die (121.8M per mm²), whereas the RTX 5090 integrates 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die (122.9M per mm²). The density figures are nearly identical, but the RTX 5090's die is more than twice as large.

The shading engine scales accordingly. The RTX 4000 Ada has 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The RTX 5090 more than triples the shading units to 21,760, with 680 TMUs and 176 ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also grows from 48 RT cores on the RTX 4000 Ada to 170 RT cores on the RTX 5090. Tensor cores jump from 192 to 680. These are not incremental changes; they represent a generational leap in parallel throughput capability.

Memory architecture differs at every level. The RTX 4000 Ada uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit interface, delivering 360.0 GB/s. The RTX 5090 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit interface, delivering 1.79 TB/s, roughly five times the bandwidth. The memory clock rates also differ: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4000 Ada versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5090.

The bus interface advances from PCIe 4.0 x16 on the RTX 4000 Ada to PCIe 5.0 x16 on the RTX 5090. Display outputs also change: the RTX 4000 Ada offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the RTX 5090 provides one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API coverage is identical.

Physical design differs as well. The RTX 4000 Ada is single-slot, 245 mm long and 112 mm tall. The RTX 5090 is dual-slot, 304 mm long, 137 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. Power connectors are both 1x 16-pin, but the suggested PSU ratings are 300 W for the RTX 4000 Ada and 950 W for the RTX 5090, reflecting the TDP gap of 130 W versus 575 W.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by workload class. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation occupies the workstation segment, evidenced by its generation label "Workstation Ada" and its predecessor "Workstation Ampere." Its average benchmark score of 135,218 sits at the 95th percentile, with nearest rivals all being professional cards: the NVIDIA A10M, AMD Radeon PRO W6800, Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, and Radeon PRO V620. These rivals are within 0.9% of its average score, indicating the RTX 4000 Ada is competitively positioned among professional GPUs.

The RTX 5090, by contrast, belongs to the GeForce 50-series consumer lineup, with a predecessor of GeForce 40 and a successor of GeForce 60. Its average benchmark score of 79,842 places it at the 92nd percentile, but its nearest rivals are a mix of older Tesla accelerators and mobile Radeon parts, with deltas from -1.4% to 1.1%. This suggests the average score is dragged down by the inclusion of PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, where scores range from 185 to 395, plus a G2D score of 1,413. Those legacy tests are not representative of modern compute or graphics workloads.

For raw performance in the two shared Geekbench tests, the RTX 5090 is decisively ahead, leading by 56.2% in OpenCL and 67.1% in Vulkan. However, the RTX 4000 Ada has a higher percentile rank (95 versus 92) and a higher average score when comparing only the tests in its benchmark set. Users seeking maximum compute throughput in Geekbench OpenCL or Vulkan should choose the RTX 5090. Users needing a professional workstation card with a compact single-slot design, lower power draw (130 W TDP versus 575 W), and a smaller suggested PSU (300 W versus 950 W) should choose the RTX 4000 Ada. The RTX 5090's launch MSRP is 1,999 USD; the RTX 4000 Ada has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Chip: AD104 (RTX 4000 Ada) versus GB202 (RTX 5090)
• Architecture: Ada Lovelace versus Blackwell 2.0
• Generation: Workstation Ada versus GeForce 50
• Transistors: 35,800 million versus 92,200 million
• Die size: 294 mm² versus 750 mm²
• Transistor density: 121.8M / mm² versus 122.9M / mm²
• Base clock: 1500 MHz versus 2017 MHz
• Boost clock: 2175 MHz versus 2407 MHz
• Memory clock: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 20 GB versus 32 GB
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR7
• Bus width: 160 bit versus 512 bit
• Bandwidth: 360.0 GB/s versus 1.79 TB/s
• Shading units: 6,144 versus 21,760
• TMUs: 192 versus 680
• ROPs: 64 versus 176
• RT cores: 48 versus 170
• Tensor cores: 192 versus 680
• Pixel rate: 139.2 GPixel/s versus 423.6 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 417.6 GTexel/s versus 1,636.8 GTexel/s
• FP32: 26.73 TFLOPS versus 104.8 TFLOPS
• FP16: 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 130 W versus 575 W
• Slot width: Single-slot versus Dual-slot
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 950 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
• Length: 245 mm (9.6 inches) versus 304 mm (12 inches)
• Height: 112 mm (4.4 inches) versus 137 mm (5.4 inches)
• Width: not recorded versus 40 mm (1.6 inches)
• Release date: 2023-08-08 versus 2025-01-29
• Predecessor: Workstation Ampere versus GeForce 40
• Successor: Blackwell PRO W versus GeForce 60

Fields that are identical include manufacturer (NVIDIA), process node (5 nm), foundry (TSMC), power connector (1x 16-pin), and all three API versions (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmark tests between these GPUs, and the RTX 5090 wins both.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370 against the RTX 4000 Ada's 146,593. The delta is -56.2% from the RTX 4000 Ada's perspective, meaning the RTX 4000 Ada trails by more than half. This is a massive gap in raw compute throughput, consistent with the FP32 specification difference: 104.8 TFLOPS versus 26.73 TFLOPS, a 3.9x advantage for the RTX 5090.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 5090 scores 376,728 against 123,842 for the RTX 4000 Ada, a delta of -67.1%. The Vulkan gap is even larger than OpenCL, suggesting the RTX 5090's additional shading units, tensor cores, and RT cores translate into a proportionally greater advantage in graphics-oriented compute workloads. The RTX 5090's Vulkan score is also higher than its own OpenCL score (376,728 versus 334,370), while the RTX 4000 Ada's Vulkan score is lower than its OpenCL score (123,842 versus 146,593). This indicates the RTX 5090 scales better with the Vulkan API's lower overhead and more direct hardware access.

No other benchmark tests are shared between the two cards. The RTX 5090 has additional PassMark entries (DirectX 9 at 395, DirectX 10 at 226, DirectX 11 at 341, DirectX 12 at 185, G2D at 1,413, G3D at 39,650, and GPU Compute at 26,756) plus a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355. The RTX 4000 Ada has no entries in those tests. The win tally is 2-0 in favor of the RTX 5090 across all recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 wins outright in every shared benchmark. Its Geekbench OpenCL lead of 56.2% and Vulkan lead of 67.1% make it the clear choice for any workload that relies on those APIs. The FP32 and FP16 throughput of 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) is four times the RTX 4000 Ada's 26.73 TFLOPS, so compute-heavy tasks such as large matrix operations, rendering simulations, or machine learning inference will favor the RTX 5090 substantially. The 32 GB GDDR7 memory with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth also supports larger datasets and faster transfers than the 20 GB GDDR6 with 360.0 GB/s.

The RTX 4000 Ada wins on efficiency and form factor. Its 130 W TDP is less than a quarter of the RTX 5090's 575 W, and its suggested PSU of 300 W is far below the 950 W required by the RTX 5090. The single-slot design (245 mm length, 112 mm height) fits in tighter chassis compared to the dual-slot RTX 5090 (304 mm length, 137 mm height, 40 mm width). The RTX 4000 Ada also holds a higher percentile rank (95 versus 92) and a higher average benchmark score (135,218 versus 79,842), though that average is calculated from a different test set.

In practical terms, the RTX 4000 Ada is positioned for professional workstation environments where multiple GPUs may be installed, power budgets are constrained, and display outputs (four DisplayPort 1.4a) are prioritized. The RTX 5090 is positioned for maximum single-GPU performance in consumer or enthusiast systems, accepting higher power draw, larger physical size, and a 1,999 USD launch MSRP. The RTX 4000 Ada's nearest rivals are all professional cards within 0.9% of its average score, while the RTX 5090's nearest rivals include older Tesla parts and mobile GPUs, reflecting its mixed benchmark profile. Choose the RTX 5090 for raw speed, the RTX 4000 Ada for workstation integration and efficiency.