NVIDIA P102-100 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records two compute-focused tests for these GPUs, and the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal wins both. The largest margin appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the TITAN X Pascal scores 66,696 against the P102-100's 49,602. That is a 34.5% advantage, a substantial gap that reflects a combination of higher shader counts, a wider memory bus, and a larger frame buffer. In Geekbench Vulkan, the TITAN X Pascal again leads, posting 77,499 versus 67,454, a 14.9% difference. While the Vulkan result is closer, the TITAN X Pascal still maintains a clear edge in both API workloads.

Looking at the broader database context, the TITAN X Pascal's average benchmark score of 72,098 places it near the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, which averages 72,379, a delta of only -0.4%. It also sits just above the AMD Radeon RX 6650M, which averages 71,768, a 0.5% difference. The P102-100, with an average score of 58,528, sits in a different performance tier, its closest rival being the AMD Radeon PRO V710 at 58,657, a -0.2% delta. The data indicates the P102-100 trades blows with cards like the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58,392, a 0.2% delta) and the Intel Arc A570M (58,239, a 0.5% delta), but it remains firmly behind the TITAN X Pascal in aggregate.

The OpenCL gap is particularly instructive for compute-heavy workloads. The TITAN X Pascal's 34.5% lead in that test is not a minor variation; it is a decisive margin that shows up in raw parallel compute throughput. The Vulkan gap, while smaller, still favors the TITAN X Pascal by nearly 15%, suggesting that even in lower-level API scenarios, the TITAN X Pascal's additional resources translate into measurable performance. No test in the database shows the P102-100 winning. The recorded data gives the TITAN X Pascal 2 wins and the P102-100 0 wins.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal has an average benchmark score of 72,098, while the NVIDIA P102-100 averages 58,528. The TITAN X Pascal also ranks at the 91st percentile among all GPUs, compared to the P102-100's 88th percentile.

Q: How close is the TITAN X Pascal to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 averages 72,379, which is only 0.4% higher than the TITAN X Pascal's 72,098. This means the two are effectively performance peers in the database's aggregate scoring.

Q: What is the biggest benchmark margin between the two cards?

A: The largest margin is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the TITAN X Pascal scores 66,696 versus the P102-100's 49,602, a 34.5% advantage for the TITAN X Pascal.

Q: Does the P102-100 beat the TITAN X Pascal in any recorded test?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The TITAN X Pascal wins both, with deltas of 34.5% and 14.9% respectively.

Q: How does the P102-100 compare to its nearest rival?

A: The P102-100's closest rival is the AMD Radeon PRO V710, which averages 58,657, a -0.2% difference. This indicates they perform within noise of each other, unlike the TITAN X Pascal's clear separation from its peers.

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench Vulkan score?

A: The TITAN X Pascal scores 77,499 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the P102-100 scores 67,454. The TITAN X Pascal leads by 14.9% in this test.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental silicon: the GP102 chip built on TSMC's 16 nm process, containing 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 25.1M per mm². Both are Pascal architecture parts, and both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The differences lie in how NVIDIA configured that silicon. The TITAN X Pascal is a fully enabled consumer compute card with 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. The P102-100, designed for mining workloads, has fewer of these resources enabled: 3,200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. This reduction in execution resources directly explains part of the performance gap seen in the benchmarks.

Clock speeds also differ. The TITAN X Pascal has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1531 MHz. The P102-100 runs higher out of the box, with a base clock of 1582 MHz and a boost clock of 1683 MHz. Despite the P102-100's higher clocks, the TITAN X Pascal's larger resource pool wins out in the recorded tests. The memory subsystem diverges as well: the TITAN X Pascal uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, while the P102-100 is limited to 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus. The TITAN X Pascal's memory operates at 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) and delivers 480.4 GB/s of bandwidth; the P102-100 runs at 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) but, due to the narrower bus, achieves only 440.3 GB/s.

The interface configuration is another significant architectural split. The TITAN X Pascal uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 connection, while the P102-100 is limited to PCIe 1.0 x4. This makes the P102-100 poorly suited for general-purpose use in a standard desktop, as the low-bandwidth interface would bottleneck data transfers. The TITAN X Pascal also has full display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the P102-100 has no display outputs at all, confirming its mining-only design intent.

Specification Differences

The two cards share a manufacturing process, die size, transistor count, and transistor density. They also share the same TDP of 250 W, the same dual-slot cooler footprint, and the same suggested power supply of 600 W. Both are end-of-life products.

The differences in recorded specifications are as follows:

• Shading Units: TITAN X Pascal has 3,584; P102-100 has 3,200.
• TMUs: TITAN X Pascal has 224; P102-100 has 200.
• ROPs: TITAN X Pascal has 96; P102-100 has 80.
• Base Clock: TITAN X Pascal is 1417 MHz; P102-100 is 1582 MHz.
• Boost Clock: TITAN X Pascal is 1531 MHz; P102-100 is 1683 MHz.
• Memory Size: TITAN X Pascal is 12 GB; P102-100 is 5 GB.
• Memory Bus Width: TITAN X Pascal is 384-bit; P102-100 is 320-bit.
• Memory Clock: TITAN X Pascal is 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective); P102-100 is 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective).
• Memory Bandwidth: TITAN X Pascal is 480.4 GB/s; P102-100 is 440.3 GB/s.
• Pixel Rate: TITAN X Pascal is 147.0 GPixel/s; P102-100 is 134.6 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: TITAN X Pascal is 342.9 GTexel/s; P102-100 is 336.6 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: TITAN X Pascal is 10.97 TFLOPS; P102-100 is 10.77 TFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: TITAN X Pascal is 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64); P102-100 is 168.3 GFLOPS (1:64).
• Power Connectors: TITAN X Pascal uses 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin; P102-100 uses 2x 8-pin.
• Bus Interface: TITAN X Pascal is PCIe 3.0 x16; P102-100 is PCIe 1.0 x4.
• Display Outputs: TITAN X Pascal has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a; P102-100 has none.
• Dimensions: TITAN X Pascal is 267 mm long, 112 mm high, 40 mm wide; P102-100 is 267 mm long with no recorded height or width.
• Release Date: TITAN X Pascal was released in August 2016; P102-100 in February 2018.
• Launch MSRP: The TITAN X Pascal had a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD. The P102-100 has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal is the stronger GPU in every recorded benchmark. It leads by 34.5% in OpenCL and by 14.9% in Vulkan, and its average benchmark score of 72,098 is far above the P102-100's 58,528. The TITAN X Pascal also has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, double the memory capacity (12 GB versus 5 GB), a wider memory bus, and higher memory bandwidth. It supports display outputs and a modern PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, making it a functional general-purpose compute card.

The P102-100, by contrast, is a specialized mining part. It has no display outputs, a severely limited PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, and a smaller memory footprint. Its higher clocks (1582 MHz base, 1683 MHz boost) do not compensate for the reduced resource counts and narrower memory bus. It also uses a different power connector arrangement (2x 8-pin versus the TITAN X Pascal's 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin), and it was released later, in February 2018, as part of NVIDIA's Mining GPUs generation.

For any workload that requires compute performance, display output, or standard desktop integration, the TITAN X Pascal is the clear choice. Its benchmark scores place it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, and it sits within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, a respected workstation card. The P102-100, while still a capable compute device in its own right (88th percentile, near the AMD Radeon PRO V710), is not designed for general use. Its 5 GB memory and lack of outputs make it unsuitable for gaming, content creation, or any task that needs a monitor attached.

The verdict from the recorded data: choose the TITAN X Pascal for versatility and outright performance. Choose the P102-100 only if the specific use case is mining or headless compute where its lower resource count and missing display outputs are acceptable, and even then, the TITAN X Pascal's benchmark superiority suggests it would handle those tasks faster as well. The 0 wins for the P102-100 in head-to-head tests leave no ambiguity.