NVIDIA RTX 6000D vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA RTX 6000D than the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile in the shared OpenCL benchmark?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 6000D scores 388,405 while the RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124,287, a 212.5% advantage for the desktop card.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX 6000D sits at the 98th percentile, while the RTX A5500 Mobile is at the 94th percentile.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The RTX 6000D is listed as Active, while the RTX A5500 Mobile is End-of-life.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus with 1.40 TB/s bandwidth, whereas the RTX A5500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are there any benchmark results where the RTX A5500 Mobile wins?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head data, the RTX 6000D wins the single shared test, and the wins count is 1 for the RTX 6000D versus 0 for the mobile part.

Q: What is the launch date for each product?

A: The RTX 6000D was released on 2025-07-13, while the RTX A5500 Mobile was released on 2022-03-21.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to entirely different design generations and physical scales. The RTX 6000D uses the GB202 chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated at 5 nm on TSMC's process. The RTX A5500 Mobile uses the GA103 chip built on Ampere architecture, fabricated at 8 nm on Samsung's process. The transistor counts reflect this gap: the GB202 packs 92,200 million transistors across a 750 mm² die, while the GA103 contains 22,000 million transistors on a 496 mm² die. Transistor density is 122.9M per mm² for the desktop part versus 44.4M per mm² for the mobile part.

The generation labels also differ: the RTX 6000D belongs to the Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation, while the RTX A5500 Mobile belongs to Ampere-MW (Ax000). The desktop card's predecessor is Workstation Ada, whereas the mobile card's predecessor is Quadro Turing-M and its successor is Ada-MW. The RTX 6000D has no successor listed, while the RTX A5500 Mobile is marked as End-of-life.

The compute resources scale dramatically. The RTX 6000D has 19,968 shading units, 624 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 156 RT cores, and 624 tensor cores. The RTX A5500 Mobile has 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 58 RT cores, and 232 tensor cores. The mobile part has roughly 37% of the shading units, 37% of the TMUs, half the ROPs, 37% of the RT cores, and 37% of the tensor cores of the desktop part.

Clock speeds differ substantially as well. The RTX 6000D runs at a base clock of 1992 MHz and a boost of 2430 MHz. The RTX A5500 Mobile runs at 975 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The desktop card's memory clock is 1560 MHz with 25 Gbps effective speed, while the mobile card's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. Power delivery is also a key architectural distinction: the RTX 6000D has a 600 W TDP with a 1x 16-pin connector and a suggested 1000 W PSU, whereas the RTX A5500 Mobile has a 165 W TDP and no power connectors, as it is portable device dependent.

The bus interfaces differ: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the RTX 6000D versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX A5500 Mobile. Display outputs are also dissimilar: the desktop card offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the mobile card's outputs are listed as portable device dependent. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark result between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX 6000D scores 388,405, and the RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124,287. The delta is 212.5% in favor of the desktop card. This is a massive margin, more than tripling the mobile GPU's score. In practical terms, the RTX 6000D delivers over three times the OpenCL compute throughput of the RTX A5500 Mobile.

To contextualize the RTX 6000D's absolute score, its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 195,964. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB (average score 194,415, delta 0.8%), the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB (187,147, delta 4.7%), the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (207,124, delta -5.4%), and the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation (184,664, delta 6.1%). The RTX 6000D sits within a tight cluster around 187k to 207k, meaning its performance is comparable to high-end data center accelerators from previous generations, with the RTX 6000D slightly ahead of the V100S and A100 SXM4, and slightly behind the A100 PCIe 80 GB.

For the RTX A5500 Mobile, its average benchmark score is 113,944. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395, delta -0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117,088, delta -2.7%), the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725, delta 2.9%), and the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393, delta -2.9%). The mobile GPU is essentially on par with the Tesla V100 SXM2, slightly behind the RTX 4000 SFF Ada and GB10, and slightly ahead of the Radeon PRO W7900. Its percentile of 94 indicates strong performance relative to all GPUs, but the gap to the RTX 6000D's 98th percentile is substantial.

The wins tally confirms the dominance: the RTX 6000D wins 1 head-to-head test, the RTX A5500 Mobile wins 0. There is no recorded test where the mobile part outperforms the desktop part. The delta of 212.5% is one of the largest margins in the database for a direct comparison, reflecting the fundamental architectural and power envelope differences.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX 6000D | NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 92,200 million | 22,000 million |

| Die Size | 750 mm² | 496 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 122.9M / mm² | 44.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1992 MHz | 975 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2430 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1560 MHz, 25 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 84 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR7 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 448 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.40 TB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19968 | 7424 |

| TMUs | 624 | 232 |

| ROPs | 192 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 156 | 58 |

| Tensor Cores | 624 | 232 |

| Pixel Rate | 466.6 GPixel/s | 144.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,516.3 GTexel/s | 348.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 97.04 TFLOPS | 22.27 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 97.04 TFLOPS (1:1) | 22.27 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 165 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | None |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm | Not listed |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-07-13 | 2022-03-21 |

| Predecessor | Workstation Ada | Quadro Turing-M |

| Successor | None | Ada-MW |

| Launch MSRP | 8,565 USD | None |

The FP32 and FP16 performance figures are identical within each card, indicating 1:1 rate for both. The RTX 6000D delivers 97.04 TFLOPS FP32, which is 4.36 times the RTX A5500 Mobile's 22.27 TFLOPS. Pixel rate is 466.6 GPixel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s, a 3.24x difference. Texture rate is 1,516.3 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s, a 4.36x difference. Memory bandwidth is 1.40 TB/s versus 512.0 GB/s, a 2.73x difference. The desktop card also has a significantly larger physical footprint at 304 mm length, 137 mm height, and 40 mm width, while the mobile card has no listed dimensions.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX 6000D is the far more powerful GPU in every recorded metric. Its 212.5% lead in Geekbench OpenCL over the RTX A5500 Mobile, combined with its 98th versus 94th percentile ranking, makes it the clear choice for workloads that demand maximum compute throughput. The RTX 6000D offers 97.04 TFLOPS FP32, 84 GB of GDDR7 memory with 1.40 TB/s bandwidth, and a 600 W TDP, positioning it as a high-end workstation or data center solution. Its average benchmark score of 195,964 places it among the top accelerators in the database, slightly ahead of the Tesla V100S and A100 SXM4, and within 5.4% of the A100 PCIe 80 GB.

The RTX A5500 Mobile, by contrast, is an end-of-life mobile GPU with 22.27 TFLOPS FP32, 16 GB of GDDR6, and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. Its average score of 113,944 places it in a league with the Tesla V100 SXM2 and RTX 4000 SFF Ada, which is respectable for a mobile part but far below the desktop card's capabilities. The mobile GPU's 165 W TDP and lack of dedicated power connectors signal its purpose: portable workstations where power efficiency and compactness matter more than raw peak performance.

For buyers who need the highest possible compute density, large memory capacity, and the latest Blackwell architecture features, the RTX 6000D is the only choice from this comparison. Its 84 GB memory capacity is over five times that of the mobile card, and its bandwidth advantage of 1.40 TB/s versus 512.0 GB/s matters for memory-bound workloads. The RTX 6000D also has a longer production life ahead, being Active versus End-of-life, and it supports PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16.

For users who require a mobile workstation GPU with strong performance relative to other portable parts, the RTX A5500 Mobile remains competitive within its own category. Its 94th percentile ranking indicates it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database. It is on par with the Tesla V100 SXM2 and slightly behind the RTX 4000 SFF Ada, which is notable given the mobile form factor's constraints. However, the data does not show any scenario where the RTX A5500 Mobile outperforms the RTX 6000D.

The verdict is straightforward: the RTX 6000D is for fixed installations, high-performance compute nodes, and professionals who need maximum throughput, while the RTX A5500 Mobile is for portable systems where the 600 W power requirement of the desktop card is simply not feasible. The 600 W TDP difference (600 W versus 165 W) is the fundamental divider. The RTX 6000D's launch MSRP is 8,565 USD, and while the mobile card has no listed MSRP, its role as a mobile part with no power connectors makes it a different product category entirely. The recorded data supports only one conclusion for raw performance, and a different one for mobility.