NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 vs NVIDIA Tesla T4 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 and NVIDIA Tesla T4 are separated by more than just time; the data shows a chasm in raw compute capability that makes direct comparison almost academic. In the two shared benchmark tests, the RTX 5090 does not merely win, it obliterates the T4’s scores. This analysis focuses strictly on the numbers, architecture, and use-case implications drawn from the provided data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370 points against the Tesla T4’s 61,276 points. That is a delta of 445.7% — the RTX 5090 delivers roughly five and a half times the OpenCL performance of the T4. The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story: the RTX 5090 hits 376,728, while the T4 manages 72,190, a delta of 421.9%. The RTX 5090 wins both head-to-head matchups, with a 2-0 record; the Tesla T4 has zero wins.

These deltas are not incremental improvements; they represent a generational leap. For context, the RTX 5090's average benchmark score is 79,842, placing it at the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, scores 79,605, a mere 0.3% behind. The RTX 5090 is essentially tied with that older compute card in average score, despite the absolute dominance shown in the head-to-head tests. Meanwhile, the Tesla T4 averages 66,733, sitting at the 90th percentile, with its closest competitor being the AMD Radeon VII at 66,004 (1.1% behind). The T4’s position among its peers is respectable for its era, but the RTX 5090 operates in a different performance tier altogether.

Looking at the RTX 5090’s individual benchmark profile, its Passmark G3D score is 39,650, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 26,756. These figures, while not directly comparable to the T4 (which lacks these specific tests in the pack), reinforce its position as a high-end consumer and workstation part. The T4 only has Geekbench results for comparison, which shows just how limited its test coverage is in this dataset. The margin of victory in the shared tests — over 400% — is the single most important takeaway.

The Verdict

The verdict is straightforward: these are not competing products. The RTX 5090 is a 5 nm Blackwell 2.0 monster designed for maximum throughput, while the Tesla T4 is a 12 nm Turing-era card built for low-power, single-slot server deployment.

For a builder needing raw performance — whether for gaming, 3D rendering, or high-end compute workloads — the RTX 5090 is the only choice. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 compute dwarf the T4’s 16 GB GDDR6, 320.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 8.141 TFLOPS. The benchmark data confirms this: the RTX 5090 is 445.7% ahead in OpenCL and 421.9% ahead in Vulkan. There is no scenario in the data where the T4 wins on performance.

However, the Tesla T4 has its own niche. It is a 70 W, single-slot, passively-cooled card (no power connectors listed) with no display outputs. It is end-of-life, launched in 2018, and intended for inference and edge servers where power draw and physical footprint are critical. The RTX 5090, by contrast, is a 575 W dual-slot card requiring a 950 W PSU and a 16-pin connector. If your priority is fitting a GPU into a space-constrained, low-power server without modifying power infrastructure, the T4 is the practical choice. But if you have the power budget and cooling, the RTX 5090 is categorically superior in every measured benchmark.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is enormous. The RTX 5090 uses the GB202 chip on a 5 nm process from TSMC, packing 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, yielding a density of 122.9 million transistors per mm². The Tesla T4 uses the TU104 chip on a 12 nm process, also from TSMC, but with only 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die, for a density of 25.0 million transistors per mm². The RTX 5090 has nearly seven times the transistor count, and its density is almost five times higher.

The core configurations are just as lopsided. The RTX 5090 features 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, 176 ROPs, 170 RT cores, and 680 tensor cores. The Tesla T4 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores. In every category, the RTX 5090 has more — often by an order of magnitude. The FP32 throughput tells the story: 104.8 TFLOPS for the 5090 versus 8.141 TFLOPS for the T4. The FP16 figures are 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) for the 5090 and 16.28 TFLOPS (2:1) for the T4, meaning the 5090 does not halve its rate for FP16, while the T4 doubles its FP32 rate.

Clock speeds reflect the different design goals. The RTX 5090 runs at a 2017 MHz base and 2407 MHz boost, while the T4 operates at a low 585 MHz base and 1590 MHz boost. The T4’s low base clock is a clear power-saving measure. Memory also diverges: the 5090 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, whereas the T4 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 5090’s memory bandwidth is over five times higher.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw performance in the shared benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5090 wins decisively, scoring 334,370 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the T4’s 61,276 (a 445.7% delta) and 376,728 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 72,190 (a 421.9% delta).

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 5090 has a TDP of 575 W and requires a 950 W suggested PSU, while the Tesla T4 has a TDP of only 70 W and a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth; the Tesla T4 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The RTX 5090 is listed as Active, released on 2025-01-29, while the Tesla T4 is End-of-life, released on 2018-09-12.

Q: Do they have the same API support?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card is physically larger?

A: The RTX 5090 is a dual-slot card measuring 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The Tesla T4 is a single-slot card at 168 mm in length, with no height or width listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 wins in every performance-centric scenario. For gaming, its massive FP32 throughput (104.8 TFLOPS) and high pixel rate (423.6 GPixel/s) make it suitable for the most demanding titles. For compute workloads — 3D rendering, scientific simulation, or AI training — its 680 tensor cores and 32 GB of GDDR7 provide the memory capacity and bandwidth needed for large datasets. Its 92nd percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms it is near the top of the stack. The only category where it does not win is power efficiency per watt, but even then, its absolute performance dwarfs the T4.

The Tesla T4 wins in deployment flexibility. Its 70 W TDP means it can be installed in systems without additional power connectors, and its single-slot design allows for high-density server configurations. With no display outputs, it is purely a compute or inference accelerator. The data shows it sits at the 90th percentile, which is respectable, but its performance ceiling is far lower. For a legacy server with a 250 W PSU budget, the T4 is the only viable option between these two. For anyone with the power headroom, the RTX 5090 is the superior part in every measurable way — the benchmarks leave no room for debate.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification field. The process node is 5 nm for the RTX 5090 versus 12 nm for the Tesla T4. Transistors are 92,200 million versus 13,600 million, and die size is 750 mm² versus 545 mm². Transistor density is 122.9M / mm² versus 25.0M / mm². Base clocks are 2017 MHz versus 585 MHz; boost clocks are 2407 MHz versus 1590 MHz. Memory size is 32 GB versus 16 GB; memory type is GDDR7 versus GDDR6; bus width is 512-bit versus 256-bit; bandwidth is 1.79 TB/s versus 320.0 GB/s. Shading units are 21,760 versus 2,560; TMUs are 680 versus 160; ROPs are 176 versus 64; RT cores are 170 versus 40; tensor cores are 680 versus 320. Pixel rate is 423.6 GPixel/s versus 101.8 GPixel/s; texture rate is 1,636.8 GTexel/s versus 254.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 104.8 TFLOPS versus 8.141 TFLOPS; FP16 is 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 16.28 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 575 W versus 70 W; slot width is dual-slot versus single-slot; power connectors are 1x 16-pin versus none; suggested PSU is 950 W versus 250 W; bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16; display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b versus no outputs; dimensions are 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm versus 168 mm in length only. Production status is Active versus End-of-life; release dates are 2025-01-29 versus 2018-09-12. The RTX 5090 also has a launch MSRP of 1,999 USD, while the T4 has no listed MSRP.