GPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation records an average benchmark score of 287,237, while the RTX A5500 Mobile records 113,944. That places the desktop card roughly 152% higher in aggregate performance.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 311,629, versus 124,287 for the RTX A5500 Mobile. The delta is 150.7% in favor of the Ada card.

Q: In the Vulkan benchmark, which card wins and by how much?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins with 262,845 points against 103,601 points for the RTX A5500 Mobile, a 153.7% advantage.

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

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 960.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their transistor counts and process nodes compare?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die. The RTX A5500 Mobile uses an 8 nm process at Samsung with 22,000 million transistors on a 496 mm² die.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each GPU in the database?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada Generation sits in the 99th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX A5500 Mobile sits in the 94th percentile.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 6000 Ada Generation dominates the RTX A5500 Mobile in every recorded benchmark. For anyone needing maximum workstation compute in a desktop chassis, the Ada card is the clear choice. Its average score of 287,237 places it in the 99th percentile, and it beats its nearest rival, the NVIDIA L40, by 1.1% while trailing the L40S by 2.9% and the AMD Instinct MI300X by 9.7%.

The RTX A5500 Mobile, by contrast, is a mobile part with an average score of 113,944, placing it in the 94th percentile. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: it trails the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 0.4%, trails the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation by 2.7%, trails the NVIDIA GB10 by 2.9%, and leads the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 by 2.9%. For a laptop GPU, that is respectable company.

Who should pick which? If the workload must run on a portable workstation, the RTX A5500 Mobile is the only option of the two. If the workload can run in a desktop tower, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is vastly faster, with more than double the memory, nearly four times the FP32 throughput, and a 150%+ lead in both recorded benchmarks. The choice is not about preference; it is about form factor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a total sweep: the RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins both recorded tests, with two wins and zero for the mobile card.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 311,629 against 124,287 for the RTX A5500 Mobile. That is a 150.7% delta, meaning the desktop card delivers roughly two and a half times the compute output of the mobile part in this workload. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation also outperforms its own nearest rivals in this metric, though the database does not record individual test scores for those rivals, only average scores.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens slightly. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation scores 262,845, while the RTX A5500 Mobile scores 103,601. The delta is 153.7%, the largest margin in the head-to-head set. Notably, the Vulkan score for the Ada card is lower than its OpenCL score, while the mobile card's Vulkan score is also lower than its OpenCL score. Both parts show a similar pattern of Vulkan lagging OpenCL, but the relative gap between the two cards remains consistent.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation's average score of 287,237 is 1.1% above the NVIDIA L40 (284,111), but 2.9% below the L40S (295,763) and 9.7% below the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994). The RTX A5500 Mobile's average of 113,944 is almost identical to the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395, a 0.4% deficit) and slightly below the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117,088, a 2.7% deficit). The mobile card's lead over the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is 2.9% (110,725). These rival comparisons show that the RTX 6000 Ada Generation competes in a much higher performance tier than the mobile part.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every hardware specification. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 18,176 shading units, 568 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 142 RT cores, and 568 tensor cores. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 58 RT cores, and 232 tensor cores. The Ada card has more than double the shading units and more than double the RT and tensor core counts.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation runs at a base of 915 MHz and boosts to 2505 MHz, with memory at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The RTX A5500 Mobile runs at a base of 975 MHz and boosts to 1500 MHz, with memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The mobile card starts with a higher base clock but has a much lower boost ceiling.

Memory is another major divider. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation offers 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A5500 Mobile offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s. The desktop card has triple the capacity and nearly double the bandwidth.

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 300 W, is dual-slot, uses a single 16-pin power connector, and requires a 700 W suggested PSU. The RTX A5500 Mobile has a TDP of 165 W, uses no power connectors (portable device dependent), and has no suggested PSU listed. The desktop card measures 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height. The mobile card has no recorded dimensions.

Display outputs differ: the RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RTX A5500 Mobile's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent." Both share the same PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation has a launch MSRP of 6,799 USD. The RTX A5500 Mobile has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD102 chip on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 125.3 million per mm². Its generation is listed as "Workstation Ada." It belongs to the GeForce 60-series family.

The RTX A5500 Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture, using the GA103 chip on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 22,000 million transistors on a 496 mm² die, with a density of 44.4 million per mm². Its generation is listed as "Ampere-MW (Ax000)." It does not have a series designation.

The transistor density gap is stark: the Ada card packs nearly three times the transistors per square millimeter. The die size difference is smaller (609 mm² versus 496 mm²), but the process node advantage (5 nm versus 8 nm) explains the density gap. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation also has a much higher FP32 throughput at 91.06 TFLOPS versus 22.27 TFLOPS for the mobile card. Both have 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratios, meaning FP16 performance equals FP32 performance on each part.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation delivers 481.0 GPixel/s and 1,422.8 GTexel/s. The RTX A5500 Mobile delivers 144.0 GPixel/s and 348.0 GTexel/s. The Ada card is roughly 3.3 times faster in pixel rate and 4.1 times faster in texture rate.

The production status for both is end-of-life. The RTX 6000 Ada Generation was released on 2022-12-02, with its predecessor listed as Workstation Ampere and its successor as Blackwell PRO W. The RTX A5500 Mobile was released on 2022-03-21, with its predecessor listed as Quadro Turing-M and its successor as Ada-MW. The Ada card launched about eight months after the mobile part.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins in every measured category. In compute benchmarks, it leads by 150.7% in OpenCL and 153.7% in Vulkan. In raw specifications, it holds advantages in shading units (18,176 versus 7,424), TMUs (568 versus 232), ROPs (192 versus 96), RT cores (142 versus 58), and tensor cores (568 versus 232). It also leads in FP32 throughput (91.06 TFLOPS versus 22.27 TFLOPS), memory capacity (48 GB versus 16 GB), memory bandwidth (960.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s), and transistor density.

The RTX A5500 Mobile wins in exactly one specification category: base clock speed, at 975 MHz versus 915 MHz. It also has a lower TDP at 165 W versus 300 W, which is an advantage for mobile deployment, though the database does not record any thermal or battery-life benchmarks to quantify that benefit.

For use cases, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is the pick for desktop workstations running large datasets, multi-GPU rendering, or any workload that can saturate 48 GB of VRAM. Its 99th percentile ranking and proximity to the L40S (within 2.9%) and the MI300X (within 9.7%) place it firmly in the high-end compute tier. The RTX A5500 Mobile is the pick for laptop workstations where portability is mandatory. Its 94th percentile ranking and tight clustering with the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation show it performs at a mid-range desktop level while consuming 165 W.

The data suggests a clear hierarchy: the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is not just faster, it is in a different performance class. The mobile card is capable, but the benchmark results show a gap that no software optimization can bridge. For anyone who can choose between the two, the desktop Ada card is the obvious performance winner. For anyone constrained to a laptop, the RTX A5500 Mobile offers competitive performance within its power envelope, sitting within 3% of the GB10 and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation in average score.