NVIDIA Quadro GV100 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 holds the edge with an average benchmark score of 35,520, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB scores 34,154. That is a difference of roughly 4% in favor of the GV100.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Quadro GV100 scores 150,004 points versus 66,998 points for the RTX A2000 12 GB, a delta of 123.9% in favor of the GV100. This is a dominant win for the older Volta-based card.

Q: What are the respective release dates of these two professional cards?

A: The Quadro GV100 was released on 2018-03-26, while the RTX A2000 12 GB came later on 2021-11-22. Both are now marked as end-of-life products.

Q: How do their transistor counts and die sizes compare?

A: The GV100 packs 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die, whereas the A2000 has 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die. The A2000 uses a denser 8 nm process from Samsung, achieving 43.5M transistors per mm², compared to the GV100's 25.9M per mm² on TSMC's 12 nm node.

Q: Which card offers more memory bandwidth, and what is the difference?

A: The Quadro GV100 provides 868.4 GB/s of bandwidth via 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus. The RTX A2000 12 GB offers 288.0 GB/s with 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The GV100's bandwidth is roughly three times higher.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) difference between the two?

A: The Quadro GV100 has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W power supply, plus one 8-pin connector. The RTX A2000 12 GB draws only 70 W, needs no external power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro GV100 is the clear winner in raw compute throughput and memory-bound workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 150,004 more than doubles the A2000's 66,998, a 123.9% advantage. This makes the GV100 the obvious choice for general-purpose GPU compute, large dataset manipulation, and any task that can leverage its 32 GB HBM2 frame buffer with 868.4 GB/s bandwidth. The data also shows the GV100 delivers 16.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 33.32 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1), giving it a massive edge in floating-point-heavy simulations or deep learning inference where tensor cores are utilized.

The RTX A2000 12 GB, by contrast, wins on efficiency and modern feature support. Its 70 W TDP means it can run in systems with a 250 W power supply, requires no auxiliary power connector, and fits into a 167 mm length — versus the GV100's 267 mm length and 250 W TDP. The A2000 also includes 26 RT cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the GV100 lacks dedicated RT cores and only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). For users prioritizing ray tracing, DXR workloads, or compact workstation builds, the A2000 is the better fit. Its 12 GB GDDR6 memory at 288.0 GB/s is still ample for many professional 3D tasks, especially considering the card's much smaller physical footprint.

In terms of benchmark percentiles, the two are nearly tied: the GV100 sits at the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the A2000 ranks at the 79th. This indicates that despite the GV100's huge compute lead, both cards occupy a similar tier in the overall landscape, with the A2000's modern architecture narrowing the gap in real-world professional workloads that favor newer API features.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro GV100 is built on the Volta architecture, using a 12 nm process at TSMC. Its GV100 chip is a massive 815 mm² die containing 21,100 million transistors. The architecture is compute-centric, with 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, plus 640 tensor cores. It has no RT cores. Memory is 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 868.4 GB/s. The FP16 rate is 33.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio versus FP32, indicating a design optimized for mixed-precision tensor operations.

The RTX A2000 12 GB uses the Ampere architecture on Samsung's 8 nm process. Its GA106 chip is much smaller at 276 mm², with 12,000 million transistors. It has 3,328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, along with 104 tensor cores and 26 RT cores. The FP16 rate is 7.987 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it does not get a throughput boost from FP16. Memory is 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s. The A2000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GV100 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The architectural divide is stark: Volta is a high-bandwidth compute monster with a 2:1 FP16 advantage, while Ampere brings hardware ray tracing, a denser process, and a more balanced FP32/FP16 profile. The GV100's 640 tensor cores dwarf the A2000's 104, but the A2000's tensor cores are from a newer generation. The GV100's 4096-bit memory bus is seven generations ahead of the A2000's 192-bit bus in width, explaining the massive bandwidth gap.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro GV100 | NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB |

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

| Architecture | Volta | Ampere |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 21,100 million | 12,000 million |

| Die Size | 815 mm² | 276 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.9M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1132 MHz | 562 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1627 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 4096 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 868.4 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 5120 | 3328 |

| TMUs | 320 | 104 |

| ROPs | 128 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 26 |

| Tensor Cores | 640 | 104 |

| FP32 | 16.66 TFLOPS | 7.987 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 33.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 70 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 167 mm (6.6 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

| Release Date | 2018-03-26 | 2021-11-22 |

| Launch MSRP | 8,999 USD | 449 USD |

The clocks differ notably: the GV100 runs at 1132 MHz base and 1627 MHz boost, while the A2000 operates at 562 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ, with the GV100 at 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective) versus the A2000's 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The A2000's higher effective memory speed does not compensate for its much narrower bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a landslide. The Quadro GV100 scores 150,004 points, while the RTX A2000 12 GB manages 66,998 points. This yields a delta of 123.9% in favor of the GV100. In practical terms, the GV100 completes OpenCL compute tasks more than twice as fast as the A2000. This result aligns with the specification sheet: the GV100 has 5120 shading units versus 3328, 640 tensor cores versus 104, 868.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 288.0 GB/s, and 32 GB of HBM2 versus 12 GB of GDDR6. The GV100's FP32 throughput of 16.66 TFLOPS is more than double the A2000's 7.987 TFLOPS, and its FP16 rate of 33.32 TFLOPS is over four times the A2000's 7.987 TFLOPS.

The A2000's lone advantage in this comparison is its architectural efficiency. Its 8 nm process yields a much higher transistor density (43.5M/mm² versus 25.9M/mm²), allowing it to deliver a respectable 7.987 TFLOPS at just 70 W. The GV100 requires 250 W to achieve its performance. However, the benchmark data does not include any test where the A2000 beats the GV100 — the wins tally stands at 1 for the GV100 and 0 for the A2000. The GV100's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (0.2% ahead) and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (0.9% behind), while the A2000's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (0.1% ahead). This places both cards in similar overall performance percentiles (80th and 79th), but the GV100's raw compute advantage in the shared test is decisive.