NVIDIA PG506-232 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result between these two cards, and it is decisively in favor of the NVIDIA PG506-232. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the PG506-232 scores 225,124, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124,812. That is an 80.4% advantage for the PG506-232, a massive margin that places the two cards in completely different performance tiers for compute workloads.

The PG506-232's score of 225,124 puts it in the 99th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D at 219,827 (2.4% behind), the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB at 207,124 (8.7% behind), and the NVIDIA RTX 6000D at 195,964 (14.9% behind). The only nearby competitor that beats it is the NVIDIA L20, which scores 251,147, a 10.4% advantage. This places the PG506-232 firmly in the upper echelon of compute-focused accelerators.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, by contrast, scores 124,812 in OpenCL, placing it in the 95th percentile. Its closest rivals are the NVIDIA GB10 at 117,393 (the RTX 4000 SFF is 0.3% ahead), the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 at 118,976 (1.6% ahead), the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114,395 (2.4% ahead), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile at 113,944 (2.8% ahead). The RTX 4000 SFF also has a Vulkan score of 109,364, but no comparable Vulkan result exists for the PG506-232 in the database.

The OpenCL delta of 80.4% is the single largest comparative figure available. The PG506-232's raw score is nearly double that of the RTX 4000 SFF. This is not a close contest; the PG506-232 is built for raw compute throughput, while the RTX 4000 SFF is designed for a different set of priorities, as the architecture and specification differences below will clarify.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA PG506-232 wins the only head-to-head compute test by 80.4%. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute performance, the PG506-232 is the superior choice by a wide margin. Its 99th percentile ranking versus the RTX 4000 SFF's 95th percentile reinforces this gap. Users whose primary metric is raw compute throughput should choose the PG506-232 without hesitation.

However, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is not without its own advantages, though they do not show up in the single compute benchmark. The RTX 4000 SFF has display outputs (4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a), while the PG506-232 has no display outputs at all. The RTX 4000 SFF also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the PG506-232 lists no API support in the database. For any workload requiring a graphical output or modern graphics APIs, the RTX 4000 SFF is the only viable option between the two.

The verdict from the data: pick the PG506-232 for pure compute density and performance. Pick the RTX 4000 SFF for any task that needs a display connection, graphics API support, or a much lower power envelope. The two cards are not direct substitutes; they serve different market segments.

Where Each One Wins

The PG506-232 wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 225,124 versus 124,812 for the RTX 4000 SFF represents an 80.4% advantage. The PG506-232 also has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 933.1 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s, a 24 GB HBM2 memory pool versus 20 GB GDDR6, and a wider 3072-bit memory bus versus 160-bit. Its FP32 throughput is 10.32 TFLOPS, while the RTX 4000 SFF delivers 19.17 TFLOPS. Interestingly, the RTX 4000 SFF has a higher FP32 figure, but the OpenCL benchmark still favors the PG506-232, suggesting the PG506-232's advantage comes from memory bandwidth and compute architecture rather than raw shader throughput.

The RTX 4000 SFF wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. It has a TDP of 70 W versus 165 W for the PG506-232, and it requires no power connectors, while the PG506-232 needs an 8-pin EPS connector. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the RTX 4000 SFF versus 450 W for the PG506-232. The RTX 4000 SFF is also much smaller: 168 mm in length versus 267 mm, and 69 mm in height versus 112 mm. Both are dual-slot cards, but the RTX 4000 SFF is dramatically more compact.

The RTX 4000 SFF also wins on graphics features. It has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the PG506-232 has none. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the PG506-232 has no API entries. The RTX 4000 SFF also has 48 RT cores, while the PG506-232 has none listed. For ray tracing or graphics workloads, the RTX 4000 SFF is the clear winner.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225,124 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 80.4% higher than the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation's score of 124,812.

Q: Does the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation have display outputs?

A: Yes, it has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The PG506-232 has no display outputs.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The PG506-232 has 933.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth from HBM2 memory on a 3072-bit bus. The RTX 4000 SFF has 280.0 GB/s from GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The PG506-232 has a TDP of 165 W and requires an 8-pin EPS connector. The RTX 4000 SFF has a TDP of 70 W and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which card supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The PG506-232 has no API support listed in the database.

Q: What are the production statuses of these cards?

A: The PG506-232 is end-of-life, while the RTX 4000 SFF is active.

Architecture Differences

The PG506-232 is built on the GA100 chip using the Ampere architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 54,200 million transistors on a die size of 826 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 65.6 million per mm². The RTX 4000 SFF uses the AD104 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The Ada Lovelace chip is more than twice as dense per square millimeter.

The PG506-232 features 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 224 tensor cores. It has no RT cores listed. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 192 tensor cores, and 48 RT cores. The RTX 4000 SFF has nearly double the shading units but fewer TMUs and ROPs. The PG506-232's FP32 throughput is 10.32 TFLOPS, while the RTX 4000 SFF achieves 19.17 TFLOPS, also nearly double.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The PG506-232 uses 24 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus, delivering 933.1 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 SFF uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 280.0 GB/s. The PG506-232's memory bandwidth is over three times higher, which explains its dominance in the OpenCL benchmark despite lower FP32 numbers.

The PG506-232 belongs to the Server Ampere generation, while the RTX 4000 SFF belongs to the Workstation Ada generation. The PG506-232's predecessor is Tesla Turing and its successor is Server Ada. The RTX 4000 SFF's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and its successor is Blackwell PRO W.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The process node differs: 7 nm for the PG506-232 versus 5 nm for the RTX 4000 SFF. Transistor counts differ at 54,200 million versus 35,800 million. Die size differs at 826 mm² versus 294 mm². Transistor density differs at 65.6M per mm² versus 121.8M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: the PG506-232 has a base clock of 930 MHz and a boost clock of 1440 MHz, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a base of 720 MHz and a boost of 1560 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: 1215 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) for the PG506-232 versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the RTX 4000 SFF.

Memory configuration differs completely: 24 GB HBM2 versus 20 GB GDDR6, 3072-bit versus 160-bit bus, and 933.1 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units differ at 3,584 versus 6,144. TMUs differ at 224 versus 192. ROPs differ at 96 versus 64. The RTX 4000 SFF has 48 RT cores; the PG506-232 has none. Tensor cores differ at 224 versus 192.

Pixel rate differs at 138.2 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s. Texture rate differs at 322.6 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 throughput both differ at 10.32 TFLOPS versus 19.17 TFLOPS. TDP differs at 165 W versus 70 W. Power connectors differ: 8-pin EPS versus none. Suggested PSU differs at 450 W versus 250 W.

Physical dimensions differ: 267 mm length versus 168 mm, and 112 mm height versus 69 mm. Display outputs differ: none versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. API support differs: none listed versus DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Production status differs: end-of-life versus active. Release dates differ: the PG506-232 was released on 2021-04-11, while the RTX 4000 SFF was released on 2023-03-20.