NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Comparison

NVIDIA’s RTX 5000 Ada Generation and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation are both workstation-class Ada Lovelace boards, but they target very different physical and performance envelopes. The data shows a clear hierarchy: the RTX 5000 Ada is the larger, faster card, while the RTX 4000 SFF is a compact, low-power alternative. Across the two available benchmark tests, the RTX 5000 Ada wins decisively, yet the RTX 4000 SFF holds its own in its designated small-form-factor role.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are one-sided, with the RTX 5000 Ada Generation taking both wins in the head-to-head comparison. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5000 scores 175,286 against the RTX 4000 SFF’s 124,812, a 40.4% advantage. That is a substantial margin for compute workloads that rely on raw parallelism. The gap widens dramatically in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 5000 posts 194,041 versus 109,364 for the RTX 4000 SFF, a 77.4% delta. The Vulkan result is particularly telling: the RTX 5000 nearly doubles the SFF card’s throughput in API-based rendering or compute tasks, suggesting its larger shader array and memory subsystem scale much better under graphics-oriented loads.

Looking at the average benchmark score, the RTX 5000 Ada sits at 184,664, placing it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in that metric include the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB (average 183,725, only 0.5% lower), the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB (187,147, 1.3% higher), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell (182,109, 1.4% lower). The RTX 5000 Ada is essentially trading blows with A100-class accelerators, which is remarkable for a workstation card. On the other side, the RTX 4000 SFF’s average score is 117,088, placing it in the 95th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393, 0.3% higher), AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (118,976, 1.6% higher), and NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395, 2.4% lower). The SFF card is competitive with those mid-range options, but it is nowhere near the performance tier of the RTX 5000 Ada.

The per-benchmark deltas underscore the architectural gulf. A 40.4% lead in OpenCL means the RTX 5000 Ada is delivering roughly 1.4x the throughput in general-purpose compute. The 77.4% lead in Vulkan is even more pronounced, indicating that the RTX 5000’s higher texture rate, pixel rate, and ray-tracing core count translate into outsized gains in graphics-heavy scenarios. For any workload that is not strictly memory-bandwidth-bound, the RTX 5000 Ada is the clear victor.

The Verdict

The data dictates a simple conclusion: the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is the superior performer in every measured benchmark. It wins both tests, with a 40.4% advantage in OpenCL and a 77.4% advantage in Vulkan over the RTX 4000 SFF. Its average benchmark score of 184,664 is 57.7% higher than the RTX 4000 SFF’s 117,088. If raw compute or graphics performance is the sole criterion, the RTX 5000 Ada is the only choice.

However, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is not without merit. Its 95th percentile ranking shows it is still a strong card overall, and its nearest rivals (GB10, Radeon PRO W7700, Tesla V100) are all credible workstation or datacenter parts. The SFF card’s advantage lies in its physical and power profile, not its benchmark scores. It is a dual-slot card with no power connectors, a 70 W TDP, and a 250 W suggested PSU, making it suitable for compact systems where the RTX 5000 Ada’s 250 W TDP and 600 W suggested PSU would be impractical.

For users with space and power constraints, the RTX 4000 SFF is the pragmatic pick, but the performance cost is steep. For anyone who needs maximum throughput per benchmark, the RTX 5000 Ada is the definitive winner. The choice is not about which is better overall, but which fits the physical and thermal constraints of the build.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the Ada Lovelace architecture and use a 5 nm TSMC process, but they are radically different chips. The RTX 5000 Ada uses the AD102 die, which contains 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 125.3 million transistors per mm². The RTX 4000 SFF uses the AD104 die, with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 121.8 million per mm². The AD102 is more than twice the die size and has more than double the transistor count, which explains the performance gap.

The core configurations differ substantially. The RTX 5000 Ada has 12,800 shading units, 400 texture mapping units, 176 ROPs, 100 ray-tracing cores, and 400 tensor cores. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. That means the RTX 5000 Ada has 2.08x the shading units, 2.08x the TMUs, 2.75x the ROPs, 2.08x the RT cores, and 2.08x the tensor cores. The ROP disparity is the largest, which directly impacts pixel fill rate: 448.8 GPixel/s for the RTX 5000 versus 99.84 GPixel/s for the SFF card, a 4.5x difference. Texture rate is also lopsided at 1,020.0 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The RTX 5000 Ada runs at a 1155 MHz base and 2550 MHz boost, while the RTX 4000 SFF runs at 720 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost. The RTX 5000’s higher boost clock, combined with its larger core count, results in FP32 performance of 65.28 TFLOPS versus 19.17 TFLOPS for the SFF card. Both cards support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning the SFF card’s FP16 is also 19.17 TFLOPS, while the RTX 5000 hits 65.28 TFLOPS.

Memory architecture is another key differentiator. The RTX 5000 Ada has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s bandwidth at 18 Gbps effective. The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 280.0 GB/s at 14 Gbps effective. The bus width difference is stark, and the RTX 5000’s bandwidth is 2.06x higher. Both cards use PCIe 4.0 x16 and support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is physical size. The RTX 5000 Ada is 267 mm long and 112 mm high, while the RTX 4000 SFF is 168 mm long and 69 mm high. The SFF card is 99 mm shorter and 43 mm lower, making it far easier to fit into small chassis. Both are dual-slot, but the RTX 5000 Ada requires a 1x 16-pin power connector, while the RTX 4000 SFF has no power connectors at all, drawing all power from the PCIe slot.

Power consumption is a major divider. The RTX 5000 Ada has a 250 W TDP and a 600 W suggested PSU, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a 70 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU. The SFF card uses 72% less power and requires a PSU that is 350 W smaller. This makes the RTX 4000 SFF suitable for systems where the RTX 5000 Ada would need a power supply upgrade.

Display outputs also differ: the RTX 5000 Ada has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RTX 4000 SFF has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The SFF card’s mini-DisplayPorts are typical for compact workstation cards, saving space on the bracket. Both cards are currently Active in production, and both have a predecessor of Workstation Ampere and a successor of Blackwell PRO W.

Release dates are also different: the RTX 4000 SFF was released on 2023-03-20, while the RTX 5000 Ada was released on 2023-08-08, nearly five months later. Neither card has a launch MSRP listed in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 184,664, compared to 117,088 for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 5000 Ada in Vulkan?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 5000 Ada scores 194,041 versus 109,364 for the RTX 4000 SFF, a 77.4% difference in favor of the RTX 5000.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada has a 250 W TDP and a 600 W suggested PSU, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a 70 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU.

Q: Do both cards use the same memory type?

A: Yes, both use GDDR6 memory. The RTX 5000 Ada has 32 GB on a 256-bit bus, and the RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB on a 160-bit bus.

Q: Which card has more ray-tracing cores?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada has 100 ray-tracing cores, while the RTX 4000 SFF has 48 ray-tracing cores.

Q: Is the RTX 4000 SFF smaller in physical size?

A: Yes, the RTX 4000 SFF is 168 mm long and 69 mm high, while the RTX 5000 Ada is 267 mm long and 112 mm high.