NVIDIA L4 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

# NVIDIA L4 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

Both cards share the AD104 chip and Ada Lovelace architecture, but they are tuned for very different jobs. The L4 is a server-focused accelerator with no display outputs, while the RTX 4000 SFF Ada is a workstation card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs. Benchmark data shows the L4 leads in raw compute, but the SFF card brings connectivity and a lower profile for compact workstations. Here is how they stack up.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The L4 wins both benchmark comparisons in the dataset, and the margins are not trivial. In Geekbench OpenCL, the L4 scores 140,838 against 124,812 for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada, a 12.8% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the L4 scores 121,306 versus 109,364, a 10.9% lead. That is a consistent pattern: the L4 is roughly 11-13% faster across both compute APIs tested.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The L4 averages 131,072 across all recorded benchmarks, while the RTX 4000 SFF averages 117,088. That is a 12% gap in average performance. Both cards sit in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, so neither is slow, but the L4 is clearly the stronger compute performer.

When looking at nearest rivals, the L4's position is interesting. It sits just 0.7% below the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti (avg score 131,938) and 3.1% below both the RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218) and the A10M (135,230). The RTX 4000 SFF Ada, by contrast, is 0.3% below the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393) and 1.6% below the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (118,976). The SFF card actually beats the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% and the RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8%. So the L4 is competing in a higher performance tier, while the SFF card is punching at or slightly above its weight class.

The wins tally confirms the direction: the L4 takes 2 wins in head-to-head tests, the RTX 4000 SFF takes 0. There is no benchmark in the dataset where the SFF card comes out ahead, which makes the choice straightforward for pure compute.

Where Each One Wins

The L4 wins on raw compute performance in every benchmark recorded. For workloads that are heavily parallel and GPU-bound, such as OpenCL compute tasks or Vulkan rendering workloads, the L4 delivers 10-13% more throughput. That advantage comes from a higher boost clock (2040 MHz vs 1560 MHz), more shading units (7424 vs 6144), more tensor cores (240 vs 192), and more RT cores (60 vs 48). The L4 also has more memory bandwidth at 300.1 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s, and a wider 192-bit memory bus versus 160-bit.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada wins on physical design and connectivity. It is a dual-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it usable in a workstation with monitors attached. The L4 has no display outputs at all, so it is strictly for headless server environments. The SFF card is also slightly shorter at 168 mm versus 169 mm, though it is taller at 69 mm versus 56 mm. Both cards draw power from the PCIe slot with no external power connectors, and both suggest a 250 W PSU, so power requirements are effectively identical.

For a workstation user who needs to drive multiple displays and do compute, the SFF card is the practical choice. For a server rack where display output is irrelevant and compute density matters, the L4 is the better fit. The L4's 24 GB memory versus 20 GB also gives it an edge for very large datasets that approach the memory ceiling.

Architecture Differences

Both cards use the same AD104 chip, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. The transistor count is identical at 35,800 million, and the die size is the same at 294 mm². Transistor density is also identical at 121.8M per mm². So the silicon is the same; the differences come from how NVIDIA configures and clocks it.

The L4 has a higher base clock (795 MHz vs 720 MHz) and a much higher boost clock (2040 MHz vs 1560 MHz). That boost clock difference is substantial — a 480 MHz gap that explains a large part of the performance delta. The L4 also enables more of the chip's resources: 7424 shading units versus 6144, 240 TMUs versus 192, 80 ROPs versus 64, 60 RT cores versus 48, and 240 tensor cores versus 192. The L4 is essentially a fuller implementation of the AD104 die, while the SFF card is a cut-down version.

Memory configuration differs as well. The L4 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, while the SFF card uses 20 GB on a 160-bit bus. The L4's memory clock is 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the SFF card. Despite the lower memory clock, the L4's wider bus gives it higher total bandwidth: 300.1 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s.

Architecturally, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both have 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratios, meaning they do not sacrifice half-precision performance. The L4 achieves 30.29 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, while the SFF card achieves 19.17 TFLOPS in both. That is a 58% gap in raw floating-point throughput, which is larger than the benchmark delta suggests because real-world tests also depend on memory and scheduling.

The generation labels differ: the L4 is from "Server Ada (Lxx)" while the SFF card is from "Workstation Ada (x000A)". The L4's predecessor is Server Ampere and successor is Server Hopper; the SFF card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and successor is Blackwell PRO W. Both were released on the same date: March 20, 2023.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA L4 | NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada |

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

| Generation | Server Ada (Lxx) | Workstation Ada (x000A) |

| Base clock | 795 MHz | 720 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2040 MHz | 1560 MHz |

| Memory size | 24 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory bus | 192 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 300.1 GB/s | 280.0 GB/s |

| Memory clock | 1563 MHz / 12.5 Gbps | 1750 MHz / 14 Gbps |

| Shading units | 7424 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 240 | 192 |

| ROPs | 80 | 64 |

| RT cores | 60 | 48 |

| Tensor cores | 240 | 192 |

| Pixel rate | 163.2 GPixel/s | 99.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 489.6 GTexel/s | 299.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 30.29 TFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 30.29 TFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 72 W | 70 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Dimensions | 169 mm x 56 mm | 168 mm x 69 mm |

| Display outputs | None | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

Both cards share the same TDP class (72 W vs 70 W), same suggested PSU (250 W), same bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x16), and same API support. The L4 is single-slot and longer; the SFF card is dual-slot and taller. The L4 has no display outputs; the SFF card has four.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA L4 is faster in both recorded benchmarks. It leads by 12.8% in Geekbench OpenCL (140,838 vs 124,812) and by 10.9% in Geekbench Vulkan (121,306 vs 109,364).

Q: Does the RTX 4000 SFF Ada have any performance advantage?

A: No. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada wins zero head-to-head benchmarks in the dataset. Its average benchmark score is 117,088, which is 12% below the L4's 131,072.

Q: Can I connect a monitor to either card?

A: Only the RTX 4000 SFF Ada supports displays, with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The NVIDIA L4 has no display outputs and is intended for headless server use.

Q: Do both cards use the same chip?

A: Yes, both use the AD104 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process with 35,800 million transistors and a 294 mm² die size. The L4 enables more of the chip's resources and runs at higher clocks.

Q: How do they compare in power consumption?

A: The L4 has a 72 W TDP and the RTX 4000 SFF Ada has a 70 W TDP. Both draw power from the PCIe slot with no external connectors and both suggest a 250 W PSU.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA L4 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 300.1 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada has 20 GB on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the NVIDIA L4 is the better compute card, and the RTX 4000 SFF Ada is the better workstation card. If your priority is raw throughput for GPU-accelerated workloads and you do not need to attach a display, the L4 is the obvious pick. It delivers 12.8% higher OpenCL scores, 10.9% higher Vulkan scores, 58% higher FP32 throughput (30.29 vs 19.17 TFLOPS), and 4 GB more memory. In a server context, the single-slot design and higher compute density make it the more efficient choice.

If you need to drive monitors, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada is the only option here, with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. It is also 2 mm shorter and runs at a slightly lower TDP (70 W vs 72 W), though it takes two slots instead of one. Its performance is still strong — it sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs and beats the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% — but it trails the L4 in every compute metric recorded.

The deciding factor should be your use case, not the benchmark numbers. For a headless server doing AI inference or rendering, the L4's extra memory and higher throughput justify its position. For a compact workstation with multiple displays, the SFF card's connectivity and adequate performance make it the practical choice. Both cards are active products released on the same date, so neither is obsolete. Choose based on whether you need display output or maximum compute per watt.