NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data covers two compute workloads: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. Across both tests, the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal holds a decisive lead over the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile, winning two out of two comparisons. The margin is substantial in both cases, but the gap widens considerably in the Vulkan test, where the TITAN X Pascal posts a score of 77499 against the RTX A1000 Mobile’s 46782. That difference translates to a 65.7% advantage for the TITAN X Pascal in Vulkan. In OpenCL, the TITAN X Pascal scores 66696, while the RTX A1000 Mobile manages 48703, resulting in a 36.9% lead for the older desktop card.

These results are not close. The TITAN X Pascal’s average benchmark score across the two tests is 72098, placing it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RTX A1000 Mobile, by contrast, averages 47743 and sits in the 85th percentile. While both cards rank above the majority of GPUs, the percentile difference understates the raw performance gap; the TITAN X Pascal’s average score is roughly 51% higher than the RTX A1000 Mobile’s. The Vulkan result is particularly striking because it shows that the gap is not merely a matter of raw compute throughput, but also of driver and architecture efficiency in a modern graphics API. The TITAN X Pascal, despite being built on an older process node and lacking dedicated ray tracing or tensor hardware, still outperforms the Ampere-based mobile chip by a wide margin in this workload.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional context for each card’s standing. The TITAN X Pascal’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, which averages 72379, a 0.4% difference from the TITAN X Pascal’s score. That is essentially a statistical tie. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M trails by 0.5%, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE is 1.8% behind. On the other side, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition leads the TITAN X Pascal by 1.7%. This cluster of scores suggests the TITAN X Pascal is operating in a tightly contested performance tier, where small architectural differences decide the ranking. The RTX A1000 Mobile, meanwhile, competes in a lower tier. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, which averages 48477, a 1.5% difference. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M is 2.2% behind the RTX A1000 Mobile, the Intel Arc A530M is 2.4% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 5600M is 2.5% behind. These deltas are all within a narrow range, indicating that the RTX A1000 Mobile is a mid-pack performer in its segment, not a standout.

The head-to-head numbers are unambiguous. The TITAN X Pascal wins the OpenCL test by more than a third, and it wins the Vulkan test by nearly two-thirds. No benchmark in the database shows the RTX A1000 Mobile ahead. The performance gap is consistent with the hardware specifications: the TITAN X Pascal has 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units, while the RTX A1000 Mobile has 2048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The TITAN X Pascal also has a 384-bit memory bus and 12 GB of GDDR5X memory, compared to the RTX A1000 Mobile’s 128-bit bus and 4 GB of GDDR6. These differences are directly reflected in the pixel and texture rates: the TITAN X Pascal delivers 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s, while the RTX A1000 Mobile delivers 36.48 GPixel/s and 72.96 GTexel/s. The TITAN X Pascal’s FP32 throughput is 10.97 TFLOPS, more than double the RTX A1000 Mobile’s 4.669 TFLOPS.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal has an average benchmark score of 72098, while the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile averages 47743. The TITAN X Pascal’s average is roughly 51% higher.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Vulkan test?

A: The TITAN X Pascal scores 77499 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the RTX A1000 Mobile scores 46782. This represents a 65.7% advantage for the TITAN X Pascal.

Q: Does the RTX A1000 Mobile win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The RTX A1000 Mobile loses both recorded tests. The TITAN X Pascal wins two out of two comparisons, with the RTX A1000 Mobile registering zero wins.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The TITAN X Pascal’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, averages 72379, a 0.4% difference. The RTX A1000 Mobile’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, averages 48477, a 1.5% difference.

Q: What are the percentile rankings of these two GPUs?

A: The TITAN X Pascal is in the 91st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RTX A1000 Mobile is in the 85th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The TITAN X Pascal has a memory bandwidth of 480.4 GB/s, based on a 384-bit bus and GDDR5X memory. The RTX A1000 Mobile has a bandwidth of 176.0 GB/s, based on a 128-bit bus and GDDR6 memory.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal is the far stronger performer in compute workloads. It wins both OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks by margins of 36.9% and 65.7%, respectively. Its average score of 72098 places it in the 91st percentile, and its nearest rivals are all within a 1.8% band, indicating that it is competitive with other high-end desktop GPUs of its era. The RTX A1000 Mobile, with an average score of 47743 and an 85th percentile ranking, is a capable mobile part, but it is not in the same performance class. Its nearest rivals are all within a 2.5% range, but that range sits far below the TITAN X Pascal’s tier.

For users who prioritize raw compute performance, particularly in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the TITAN X Pascal is the clear choice based on the recorded measurements. The RTX A1000 Mobile has advantages in power consumption and portability, but the benchmark data does not show any scenario where it outperforms the TITAN X Pascal. The TITAN X Pascal’s 250 W TDP and dual-slot form factor are trade-offs, but they are trade-offs that buy more than double the FP32 throughput and a much wider memory interface.

The RTX A1000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 60 W TDP and an integrated form factor, making it suitable for laptops or compact systems. It also supports modern features like ray tracing cores and tensor cores, which the TITAN X Pascal lacks entirely. However, in the two benchmarks recorded, those features do not translate into higher scores. The RTX A1000 Mobile’s FP16 performance matches its FP32 performance at 4.669 TFLOPS, whereas the TITAN X Pascal’s FP16 is severely limited at 171.5 GFLOPS. That distinction matters for certain workloads, but it is not reflected in the Geekbench results.

Ultimately, the verdict depends on the use case. If the workload is raw compute and the system can accommodate a large, power-hungry desktop card, the TITAN X Pascal is the better performer by every measured metric. If the workload is mobile, power-constrained, or relies on ray tracing or tensor operations, the RTX A1000 Mobile is the only viable option, despite its lower benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification. The TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip and the Pascal architecture, while the RTX A1000 Mobile uses the GA107 chip and the Ampere architecture. The process nodes differ significantly: the TITAN X Pascal is built on a 16 nm process at TSMC, while the RTX A1000 Mobile uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. The TITAN X Pascal has 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 25.1M per mm². The RTX A1000 Mobile has 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, with a transistor density of 43.5M per mm².

Clock speeds also diverge. The TITAN X Pascal runs at a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1531 MHz, while the RTX A1000 Mobile runs at 630 MHz base and 1140 MHz boost. Memory clocks are comparable in effective terms: 10 Gbps for the TITAN X Pascal and 11 Gbps for the RTX A1000 Mobile. The TITAN X Pascal has 12 GB of GDDR5X memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 480.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A1000 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 176.0 GB/s.

Compute resources differ substantially. The TITAN X Pascal has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX A1000 Mobile has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN X Pascal has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores, while the RTX A1000 Mobile has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 147.0 GPixel/s for the TITAN X Pascal versus 36.48 GPixel/s for the RTX A1000 Mobile. Texture rate is 342.9 GTexel/s versus 72.96 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 10.97 TFLOPS versus 4.669 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specifications are also distinct. The TITAN X Pascal has a TDP of 250 W, requires a 600 W suggested PSU, uses a dual-slot cooler, and needs one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector. The RTX A1000 Mobile has a TDP of 60 W, requires no external power connectors, and has an integrated form factor. The TITAN X Pascal uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RTX A1000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs differ as well: the TITAN X Pascal has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RTX A1000 Mobile’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is fundamental. The TITAN X Pascal is built on the Pascal architecture, which was designed for high-end desktop compute and gaming. It uses a 16 nm TSMC process and a large 471 mm² die. Pascal does not include dedicated ray tracing or tensor hardware, and its FP16 performance is severely limited at 171.5 GFLOPS, reflecting a 1:64 ratio relative to FP32. The TITAN X Pascal’s 384-bit memory bus and 12 GB of GDDR5X are suited to bandwidth-heavy workloads, and its 96 ROPs and 224 TMUs support high fill rates.

The RTX A1000 Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture, which introduces dedicated ray tracing cores and tensor cores. It has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the TITAN X Pascal. Ampere also provides full-rate FP16 execution: the RTX A1000 Mobile’s FP16 performance is 4.669 TFLOPS, equal to its FP32 performance at a 1:1 ratio. The RTX A1000 Mobile uses a smaller 200 mm² die on an 8 nm Samsung process, which is more transistor-dense at 43.5M per mm².

The memory subsystems reflect different design goals. The TITAN X Pascal’s GDDR5X memory operates at 10 Gbps effective, while the RTX A1000 Mobile’s GDDR6 operates at 11 Gbps effective. The TITAN X Pascal’s wider bus (384-bit versus 128-bit) gives it a massive bandwidth advantage: 480.4 GB/s versus 176.0 GB/s. The TITAN X Pascal also uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the RTX A1000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which offers higher per-lane bandwidth but fewer lanes.

The feature sets also differ in API support. The TITAN X Pascal supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RTX A1000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX A1000 Mobile’s support for DirectX 12 Ultimate is tied to its ray tracing and mesh shading capabilities, which the Pascal architecture cannot provide. The TITAN X Pascal’s release date is August 2016, while the RTX A1000 Mobile’s release date is March 2022, a gap of nearly six years.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN X Pascal wins in every recorded benchmark. It leads by 36.9% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 65.7% in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average score is 72098, and it holds a 91st percentile ranking. The card’s strengths are raw compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and fill rates. It is the better choice for any workload that depends on FP32 performance, high pixel or texture throughput, or large memory capacity. The 12 GB of GDDR5X memory and 480.4 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets or high-resolution rendering tasks. The TITAN X Pascal’s 3584 shading units and 10.97 TFLOPS FP32 performance give it a clear edge in traditional compute workloads.

The RTX A1000 Mobile wins in no benchmark, but it has advantages in specific areas that are not captured by the recorded tests. It has a 60 W TDP, which is significantly lower than the TITAN X Pascal’s 250 W, making it suitable for battery-powered or thermally constrained systems. It requires no external power connectors and has an integrated form factor, enabling thin and light laptop designs. Its 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores support hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads, which the TITAN X Pascal cannot handle at all. The RTX A1000 Mobile’s FP16 performance is equal to its FP32 performance, a feature that matters for mixed-precision compute. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides higher per-lane bandwidth than the TITAN X Pascal’s PCIe 3.0 x16.

In terms of benchmark scores, the RTX A1000 Mobile’s nearest rivals are all within a 2.5% band, with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT leading by 1.5%. This indicates that the RTX A1000 Mobile is a solid mid-range mobile GPU, but it does not compete with high-end desktop cards. The TITAN X Pascal’s nearest rivals are also tightly clustered, with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 leading by 0.4% and the AMD Radeon RX 6650M trailing by 0.5%. The TITAN X Pascal sits comfortably in the upper tier of the database.

For users who need maximum performance in OpenCL or Vulkan, the TITAN X Pascal is the only choice, based on the data. For users who need a mobile GPU with modern features like ray tracing and tensor cores, the RTX A1000 Mobile is the appropriate option, despite its lower benchmark scores. The two cards serve different markets, and the benchmark results reflect that division. The TITAN X Pascal is a desktop compute powerhouse, while the RTX A1000 Mobile is a feature-rich mobile part with a focus on efficiency and modern API support. Neither card is a substitute for the other.