NVIDIA L4 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A5500 and NVIDIA L4 represent two distinct approaches to professional computing: one is a workstation-focused Ampere card, the other a server-oriented Ada Lovelace part. The benchmark data available shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the architectural and physical differences reveal that each card is optimized for a very different deployment scenario. The RTX A5500 holds a decisive lead in raw compute benchmarks, while the L4 counters with dramatically higher efficiency and a smaller footprint.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is straightforward, with the NVIDIA RTX A5500 winning both recorded benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A5500 scores 174,637 against the L4’s 140,838, a delta of 24%. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the A5500 delivers roughly a quarter more compute throughput in this API. The gap widens further in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the A5500 achieves 155,797 points versus the L4’s 121,306, resulting in a 28.4% advantage for the Ampere card.

These results align with the cards’ average benchmark scores. The RTX A5500 posts an average score of 165,217 across all tests, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs. The L4’s average is 131,072, which lands it in the 95th percentile. The 34,145-point gap in average scores mirrors the head-to-head deltas, confirming that the A5500 is consistently faster in synthetic workloads. Notably, the A5500’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, scores 164,894, just 0.2% behind, while the L4’s closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti, scores 131,938, which is 0.7% ahead of the L4.

The data shows no scenario where the L4 wins in raw performance. However, the context of these numbers is critical. The A5500’s 24% OpenCL lead and 28.4% Vulkan lead come with a much larger power envelope. The A5500’s fp32 compute is rated at 34.10 TFLOPS, while the L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS. The performance difference is therefore not proportional to the compute rating alone, suggesting that memory bandwidth and other factors play a role in the benchmark outcomes.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A5500 wins in every measured performance metric. Its 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus delivers 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth, more than double the L4’s 300.1 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage is likely a key reason for the A5500’s superior Geekbench scores, as memory-intensive workloads benefit disproportionately from higher throughput. The A5500 also has more execution resources: 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 80 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores, versus the L4’s 7,424 shading units, 240 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores.

The L4, however, wins decisively in efficiency and physical design. Its 72 W TDP is less than a third of the A5500’s 230 W. This allows the L4 to be a single-slot, 169 mm card with no power connectors, while the A5500 is a dual-slot, 267 mm card requiring a single 8-pin connector. The L4’s suggested PSU is 250 W, compared to 550 W for the A5500. For dense server deployments where power and space are at a premium, the L4 is the clear choice. The L4 also has a much higher transistor density at 121.8M per mm² versus the A5500’s 45.1M per mm², reflecting the newer 5 nm process node.

The L4’s production status is Active, while the A5500 is End-of-life. This means the L4 is the more future-proof option for new deployments, even if its performance is lower. The L4’s successor is listed as Server Hopper, indicating a clear upgrade path, whereas the A5500’s successor is Workstation Ada.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The RTX A5500 uses the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It features 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². The L4 uses the AD104 chip, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a much smaller 294 mm² die, achieving a density of 121.8M per mm². This nearly threefold density increase is a hallmark of the architectural leap from Ampere to Ada Lovelace.

Clock speeds tell an interesting story. The A5500 has a higher base clock at 1080 MHz, but the L4 boosts higher at 2040 MHz versus 1665 MHz. The L4’s lower base clock of 795 MHz suggests it is designed to idle efficiently, while its higher boost clock allows it to reach peak performance when needed. Memory clocks also differ: the A5500 runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, while the L4 runs at 1563 MHz with 12.5 Gbps effective. The A5500’s wider 384-bit bus compensates for its clock advantage, resulting in the aforementioned bandwidth disparity.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. However, the L4 has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator, while the A5500 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The L4’s server orientation is further emphasized by its single-slot design and lack of power connectors, whereas the A5500’s dual-slot design and 8-pin connector are typical of workstation cards.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 has an average benchmark score of 165,217, which is significantly higher than the NVIDIA L4’s 131,072. The A5500 also ranks in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, while the L4 ranks in the 95th.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A5500 in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RTX A5500 scores 155,797 in Geekbench Vulkan, compared to the L4’s 121,306. This represents a 28.4% advantage for the A5500, the largest margin seen in the head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The L4 has a TDP of 72 W, while the RTX A5500 has a TDP of 230 W. The L4 also requires no power connectors and has a suggested PSU of 250 W, compared to the A5500’s single 8-pin connector and 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both cards have 24 GB of GDDR6 memory. However, the A5500 uses a 384-bit bus with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the L4 uses a 192-bit bus with 300.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card is still in production?

A: The NVIDIA L4 is marked as Active in production status, while the NVIDIA RTX A5500 is listed as End-of-life. This suggests the L4 is the current-generation product for new server deployments.

Q: Are there any differences in compute resources?

A: Yes, the RTX A5500 has more of every resource type: 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 80 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores. The L4 has 7,424 shading units, 240 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for two distinct use cases. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 is the performance leader by a wide margin. Its 24% lead in OpenCL and 28.4% lead in Vulkan, combined with double the memory bandwidth and more compute resources, make it the superior choice for workstation tasks where raw throughput is paramount. Its 97th percentile ranking and average score of 165,217 place it firmly above the L4 in synthetic benchmarks.

However, the NVIDIA L4 is not a direct competitor in the traditional sense. Its 72 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors are characteristics of a server accelerator designed for density and efficiency, not peak performance. The L4’s 95th percentile ranking is still respectable, but its 131,072 average score is 20.7% lower than the A5500. For deployments where multiple GPUs must fit in a single chassis and power budgets are tight, the L4’s lower power draw and smaller size are decisive advantages.

The choice comes down to the application. If the workload demands maximum compute and bandwidth, and power and space are not constraints, the RTX A5500 is the clear winner based on all available benchmark data. If the priority is maximizing GPU density per watt and per rack unit, the L4 is the only viable option given its 72 W envelope and compact footprint. The A5500’s end-of-life status and the L4’s active production status further tilt long-term procurement decisions toward the L4, despite its lower performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A5500 | NVIDIA L4 |

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

| Chip | GA102 | AD104 |

| Architecture | Ampere | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.1M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1080 MHz | 795 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2040 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 768.0 GB/s | 300.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 10240 | 7424 |

| TMUs | 320 | 240 |

| ROPs | 96 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 80 | 60 |

| Tensor Cores | 320 | 240 |

| Pixel Rate | 159.8 GPixel/s | 163.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 532.8 GTexel/s | 489.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 34.10 TFLOPS | 30.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 34.10 TFLOPS (1:1) | 30.29 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 230 W | 72 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 169 mm (6.7 inches) |

| Height | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | 56 mm (2.2 inches) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2022-03-21 | 2023-03-20 |

| Generation | Workstation Ampere (Ax000) | Server Ada (Lxx) |