NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 in the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 311,629 against 141,837 for the RTX A4500. That is a 119.7% advantage for the Ada card, meaning it more than doubles the A4500's compute output in this workload. The gap is slightly narrower but still massive in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX 6000 Ada Generation posts 262,845 versus 129,980 for the RTX A4500, a 102.2% improvement. In both tests, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins outright, and the A4500 fails to claim a single head-to-head victory.

Context from the database's nearest-rival comparisons reinforces this hierarchy. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation sits at the 99th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 287,237. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA L40, which averages 284,111, only 1.1% behind. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation also leads the NVIDIA L20 by 14.4% (L20 averages 251,147). However, it trails the NVIDIA L40S by 2.9% (L40S averages 295,763) and the AMD Instinct MI300X by 9.7% (MI300X averages 317,994). These figures show that the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is not the absolute peak of the database, but it is firmly in the upper tier of workstation-class accelerators.

The RTX A4500, by contrast, ranks at the 93rd percentile with an average benchmark score of 91,671. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile, averages 91,134, a negligible 0.6% difference. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 sits 0.9% behind at 92,466, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 trails by 4.8% at 87,445, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 trails by 5.2% at 87,108. The A4500's position among these rivals indicates that it competes in a much lower performance band than the RTX 6000 Ada Generation. The average benchmark score difference between the two cards is roughly 195,566 points, which corresponds to a performance ratio of about 3.1 to 1 in favor of the Ada card. The head-to-head deltas, 119.7% and 102.2%, are consistent with that overall spread.

Architecture Differences

The underlying hardware explains the scale of this performance separation. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is built on the AD102 chip using the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The RTX A4500 uses the GA102 chip with the Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The process node difference is substantial: 5 nm versus 8 nm, which directly affects transistor density. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, yielding a density of 125.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The RTX A4500 contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, for a density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. Despite having a slightly smaller die, the Ada card fits roughly 2.7 times more transistors, a direct consequence of the denser manufacturing process.

Clock behavior also differs. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has a base clock of 915 MHz and a boost clock of 2505 MHz. The RTX A4500 has a higher base clock of 1050 MHz but a much lower boost clock of 1650 MHz. The Ada card's boost clock is 855 MHz higher, which compounds with its larger core count to produce far greater throughput. The memory subsystems diverge as well. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation ships with 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 2500 MHz with 20 Gbps effective data rate. The RTX A4500 offers 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 640.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. The Ada card provides 2.4 times the memory capacity and exactly 50% more memory bandwidth.

Compute resources show an even larger gap. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 18,176 shading units, 568 texture mapping units, and 192 ROPs. Its ray tracing core count is 142, and its tensor core count is 568. The RTX A4500 has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores. The Ada card therefore has about 2.5 times the shading units, 2.5 times the TMUs, double the ROPs, 2.5 times the ray tracing cores, and 2.5 times the tensor cores. The pixel rate for the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 481.0 GPixel/s, versus 158.4 GPixel/s for the A4500. The texture rate is 1,422.8 GTexel/s versus 369.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 91.06 TFLOPS for the Ada card and 23.65 TFLOPS for the A4500, a 3.85x difference. Both cards support FP16 at the same rate as FP32, so the FP16 figures mirror the FP32 numbers exactly.

Power and physical specifications also differ, though both cards are dual-slot designs with identical dimensions of 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has a 300 W TDP, a single 16-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 700 W. The RTX A4500 has a 200 W TDP, a single 8-pin connector, and a suggested PSU of 550 W. Both use a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface and provide 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The production status for both is end-of-life. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation was released on 2022-12-02, succeeding Workstation Ampere and preceding Blackwell PRO W. The RTX A4500 was released on 2021-11-22, succeeding Quadro Turing and preceding Workstation Ada. The launch MSRP for the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 6,799 USD; the A4500 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data provides a clear split: the RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins both recorded head-to-head tests, and the RTX A4500 wins none. In OpenCL, the Ada card's 119.7% lead suggests workloads that scale with raw compute throughput, such as rendering, simulation, and data-parallel compute, will see roughly double the performance on the RTX 6000 Ada Generation. In Vulkan, the 102.2% lead indicates that graphics-heavy tasks, including real-time visualization and GPU-accelerated viewport rendering, also favor the Ada card by a wide margin. The RTX A4500 does not have a single benchmark in the database where it beats the RTX 6000 Ada Generation, so there is no measured workload category where it comes out ahead.

That said, the RTX A4500 has attributes that may matter in specific deployments. Its 200 W TDP and single 8-pin connector mean it draws less power and uses a more common power interface. Its 20 GB of GDDR6 memory, while smaller than 48 GB, is still substantial for many professional tasks, and its 640.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for moderate data sets. The A4500 also has a higher base clock (1050 MHz versus 915 MHz), which could indicate better efficiency at idle or lightly threaded loads, though the database does not include power efficiency measurements. The A4500 ranks at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, so it is not a weak card in absolute terms; it simply operates in a lower tier than the RTX 6000 Ada Generation.

For users whose workloads fit within the A4500's 20 GB memory envelope and whose performance requirements are moderate, the A4500 can still handle professional applications. The database's nearest-rival data shows it is competitive with other mid-range workstation cards, trailing the RTX A4500 Mobile by only 0.6%, leading the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 by 0.9%, the Quadro GP100 by 4.8%, and the Radeon PRO W7600 by 5.2%. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation, in contrast, competes with top-tier accelerators: it leads the L40 by 1.1% and the L20 by 14.4%, while trailing the L40S by 2.9% and the MI300X by 9.7%. The performance class difference is the dominant factor in any comparison between these two cards.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation than the NVIDIA RTX A4500 in OpenCL?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 311,629 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the RTX A4500 scores 141,837. That is a 119.7% advantage for the Ada card.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 960.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A4500 has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 640.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which architecture does each card use?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD102 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC. The RTX A4500 uses the Ampere architecture on the GA102 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process by Samsung.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures for both cards?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation delivers 91.06 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The RTX A4500 delivers 23.65 TFLOPS. Both cards also support FP16 at the same rate as FP32.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of power draw?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has a 300 W TDP with a single 16-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 700 W. The RTX A4500 has a 200 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each card in the database?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is at the 99th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 287,237. The RTX A4500 is at the 93rd percentile, with an average benchmark score of 91,671.

Q: Does the RTX A4500 win any benchmark against the RTX 6000 Ada Generation?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins both. The win count is 2 for the Ada card and 0 for the A4500.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most users: the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation is the stronger card by a wide margin. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, with leads of 119.7% in OpenCL and 102.2% in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 287,237 places it at the 99th percentile, while the RTX A4500's average of 91,671 places it at the 93rd percentile. The Ada card also offers more than double the memory capacity (48 GB versus 20 GB), 50% more memory bandwidth (960.0 GB/s versus 640.0 GB/s), and nearly four times the FP32 throughput (91.06 TFLOPS versus 23.65 TFLOPS). For any workload that can utilize these resources, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is the clear choice.

The RTX A4500 is not without merit. It draws less power (200 W versus 300 W), uses a standard 8-pin connector, and has a lower suggested PSU requirement (550 W versus 700 W). Its 20 GB memory capacity and 640.0 GB/s bandwidth are respectable for a mid-range workstation card, and its 93rd percentile ranking shows it outperforms several other professional GPUs in the database. For users with modest performance needs, limited power budgets, or systems that cannot accommodate a 16-pin connector, the A4500 remains a viable option.

However, the performance gap is so large that the A4500 cannot be recommended as a substitute for the RTX 6000 Ada Generation in compute-heavy or graphics-intensive workflows. The Ada card's nearest rivals are all top-tier accelerators: it leads the L40 by 1.1% and the L20 by 14.4%, and it trails only the L40S and MI300X among its closest competitors. The A4500's nearest rivals, by contrast, are mid-range cards like the RTX A4500 Mobile and the Radeon PRO W7600, with deltas of 0.6% to 5.2%. These two cards operate in entirely different performance classes.

The choice depends on the workload and the system constraints. For users who need maximum compute throughput, large memory buffers, and high-bandwidth access to data, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is the only sensible pick from this comparison. For users who prioritize lower power draw, simpler power cabling, and are willing to accept roughly half the performance in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, the RTX A4500 can serve as a capable workstation card. The database records no measured scenario where the A4500 outperforms the RTX 6000 Ada Generation, so any decision favoring the A4500 must be based on power, cost, or system integration factors rather than raw performance.