NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile represent two distinct generations of NVIDIA’s professional workstation lineup. The former is a compact, dual-slot desktop card built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, while the latter is a mobile Ampere part designed for laptops. Benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy between them, with the desktop Ada card dominating in both available tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test provides the first direct comparison. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124812, while the RTX A4500 Mobile scores 105307. That is an 18.5% delta in favor of the Ada card. This margin is substantial, indicating that the desktop part delivers noticeably higher raw compute throughput in this OpenCL workload. The RTX A4500 Mobile’s score of 105307 places it close to its own nearest rival, the desktop RTX A4500, which averages 91671 (a 0.6% difference), but it trails the Ada card by a wide gap.

The Vulkan test widens the divide considerably. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation posts 109364, versus 76960 for the RTX A4500 Mobile. That is a 42.1% delta, a massive advantage for the Ada card. In Vulkan, the mobile Ampere part falls behind even its average benchmark score of 91134, suggesting the workload favors the newer architecture’s feature set and execution efficiency. The Ada card’s Vulkan score of 109364 is also higher than its OpenCL result, whereas the A4500 Mobile’s Vulkan score is dramatically lower than its OpenCL result, reinforcing that the Ada architecture handles modern graphics APIs more effectively.

Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins both, with a 2-0 record. No benchmark in the data shows the A4500 Mobile ahead. The average benchmark score reflects this: the Ada card averages 117088, while the A4500 Mobile averages 91134. That is a 25,954-point difference, or roughly 28.5% higher for the Ada part, though the head-to-head deltas (18.5% and 42.1%) are the more precise indicators of per-test performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the RTX A4500 Mobile uses the GA104 chip on the Ampere architecture, built by Samsung on an 8 nm process. That chip contains 17,400 million transistors on a larger 392 mm² die, translating to just 44.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The Ada chip is smaller yet packs over twice the transistor count, a direct result of the denser 5 nm node.

The compute configurations differ as well. The Ada card has 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 raster output units (ROPs). The A4500 Mobile has 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. While the Ada card leads in shading units and TMUs, the mobile Ampere part has 50% more ROPs (96 versus 64), which influences pixel throughput. Ray tracing cores also differ: 48 on the Ada card versus 46 on the A4500 Mobile. Tensor cores follow the same pattern, with 192 on the Ada card and 184 on the mobile part. These differences are modest in absolute terms, but the architectural generation gap means the Ada cores are more efficient at similar tasks.

The memory subsystem reflects a different design philosophy. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A4500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing 512.0 GB/s. The mobile part has a wider bus and nearly double the bandwidth, despite less capacity. The Ada card compensates with a smaller bus but relies on higher memory clock speeds in terms of effective data rate: 14 Gbps effective versus 16 Gbps effective for the Ampere part. The Ada card also has a lower base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz, while the A4500 Mobile runs at 930 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The mobile part’s higher base clock and wider memory bus explain its higher pixel rate (144.0 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s) despite fewer shading units.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in compute-heavy benchmarks. Its OpenCL score of 124812 and Vulkan score of 109364 both exceed the A4500 Mobile’s results by significant margins (18.5% and 42.1%, respectively). This makes it the stronger choice for applications that stress raw FP32 throughput, ray tracing workloads, or Vulkan-based rendering pipelines. Its FP32 performance is rated at 19.17 TFLOPS, ahead of the A4500 Mobile’s 17.66 TFLOPS. The Ada card also has more shading units, TMUs, and tensor cores, which can benefit AI inference tasks in professional software.

The RTX A4500 Mobile wins in memory bandwidth and pixel fill rate. With 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 280.0 GB/s, it excels in scenarios where large data sets must be streamed quickly, such as high-resolution texture loading or certain compute kernels that are memory-bound. Its pixel rate of 144.0 GPixel/s is 44% higher than the Ada card’s 99.84 GPixel/s, which can help in rasterization-heavy scenes at high resolutions. However, these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins in the available data, as the A4500 Mobile loses both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests. The mobile part also has a higher base clock (930 MHz versus 720 MHz), which may help in short bursts of activity, but its boost clock (1500 MHz) is lower than the Ada card’s 1560 MHz.

For use-case splitting, the Ada card is the clear pick for modern compute and graphics workloads, particularly those using Vulkan. The 42.1% delta in Vulkan is decisive. The A4500 Mobile’s 16 GB memory and higher bandwidth could be preferable for large model fits or memory-intensive tasks, but the benchmark data does not show any workload where it outperforms the Ada card. The Ada card also has a higher average benchmark score (117088) and ranks at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, versus the 93rd percentile for the A4500 Mobile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification. The process node is 5 nm for the Ada card versus 8 nm for the A4500 Mobile. The foundry is TSMC for Ada and Samsung for Ampere. Transistor counts are 35,800 million versus 17,400 million, and die sizes are 294 mm² versus 392 mm². The Ada card has a higher transistor density at 121.8M/mm² versus 44.4M/mm².

Memory capacity differs: 20 GB versus 16 GB. The bus width is 160-bit for Ada and 256-bit for Ampere. Bandwidth is 280.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s. Effective memory speed is 14 Gbps for Ada and 16 Gbps for Ampere. Shading units are 6144 versus 5888, TMUs are 192 versus 184, and ROPs are 64 versus 96. Ray tracing cores are 48 versus 46, and tensor cores are 192 versus 184.

Pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s for Ada and 144.0 GPixel/s for Ampere. Texture rate is 299.5 GTexel/s versus 276.0 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance are both rated at 19.17 TFLOPS for Ada and 17.66 TFLOPS for Ampere, with a 1:1 ratio on both. TDP is 70 W for the Ada card versus 140 W for the A4500 Mobile. The Ada card is dual-slot, while the A4500 Mobile has no slot width specified. The Ada card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the A4500 Mobile’s display outputs are portable-device dependent.

Other differences: the Ada card’s release date is 2023-03-20, while the A4500 Mobile’s is 2022-03-21. The Ada card is listed as Active production status, while the A4500 Mobile is End-of-life. The Ada card’s predecessor is Workstation Ampere and successor is Blackwell PRO W; the A4500 Mobile’s predecessor is Quadro Turing-M and successor is Ada-MW. The Ada card has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the A4500 Mobile has none listed. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and have no power connectors. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation averages 117088, while the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile averages 91134.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 109364 versus 76960 for the RTX A4500 Mobile, a 42.1% delta in favor of the Ada card.

Q: Does the RTX A4500 Mobile have any specification advantage over the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation?

A: Yes, the A4500 Mobile has a wider 256-bit memory bus versus 160-bit, higher memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s), more ROPs (96 versus 64), and a higher pixel rate (144.0 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s).

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the RTX A4500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Which GPU is built on a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses a 5 nm TSMC process, while the RTX A4500 Mobile uses an 8 nm Samsung process.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the RTX A4500 Mobile has a TDP of 140 W and no suggested PSU listed.