NVIDIA RTX A400 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data provides a complete benchmark profile for the NVIDIA RTX A400, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation has no individual benchmark scores listed in the database. This asymmetry means a direct score-for-score comparison is not possible from the available measurements. However, the A400's performance can be contextualized through its nearest rivals, which include the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, NVIDIA Quadro P2000, Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, and AMD Radeon 760M.

The RTX A400 achieves an average benchmark score of 6078 across all recorded tests. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, scores 6077, a delta of 0 percent, indicating statistical parity. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, placing it 0.5 percent behind the A400. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 6117, which is 0.6 percent ahead of the A400. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 6019, putting it 1 percent behind. These margins are remarkably tight, suggesting the A400 sits in a narrow performance band where no rival holds a decisive advantage.

Within the A400's own benchmark suite, the Geekbench OpenCL score of 22844 and Vulkan score of 22237 demonstrate compute capability far exceeding its Passmark results. The Passmark G3D score of 5983 contrasts with the GPU compute score of 2557, indicating that graphics rendering tasks and compute workloads stress the hardware differently. The DirectX 9 score of 87 is the highest among the DirectX tests, while DirectX 12 scores only 27, which may reflect driver optimization or architectural priorities rather than raw capability.

The RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation's percentile rank of 50 places it at the median of all GPUs in the database, despite having no recorded benchmark scores. The A400's percentile rank of 35 puts it below the median, which aligns with its modest absolute scores. The delta between these percentiles suggests the PRO 4500 occupies a substantially higher performance tier, though the absence of direct measurements precludes quantifying the gap.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent entirely different generations and design philosophies. The RTX A400 uses the GA107 chip built on Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation uses the GB203 chip on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. This process difference alone accounts for significant efficiency and density improvements: the A400's die measures 200 mm² with 8,700 million transistors, yielding a density of 43.5 million transistors per mm². The PRO 4500's die measures 378 mm² with 45,600 million transistors, achieving 120.6 million transistors per mm², nearly three times the density.

Core counts diverge dramatically. The A400 packs 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores. The PRO 4500 scales to 10496 shading units, 328 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 82 RT cores, and 328 tensor cores. These figures represent order-of-magnitude differences: the PRO 4500 has roughly 13.7 times the shading units and 13.7 times the tensor cores of the A400. The RT core count difference is even starker, at 82 versus 6, a factor of 13.7 as well.

Clock speeds also favor the PRO 4500. The A400 runs at a base of 1417 MHz and boosts to 1762 MHz. The PRO 4500 starts at 1635 MHz and boosts to 2407 MHz. The boost delta of 645 MHz, combined with the massive core count advantage, explains the FP32 throughput gap: the A400 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS, while the PRO 4500 reaches 50.53 TFLOPS, an 18.7 times difference. Both cards offer FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so the same multiplier applies to half-precision workloads.

Memory subsystems reflect the generational leap. The A400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The PRO 4500 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 896.0 GB/s, approximately 9.3 times the bandwidth. Memory clocks differ as well: the A400 runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the PRO 4500 runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The eight-fold increase in VRAM capacity and nearly ten-fold increase in bandwidth position the PRO 4500 for datasets that would exhaust the A400's memory entirely.

Power and physical specifications reinforce the divide. The A400 consumes 50 W with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, fitting a single-slot, 163 mm long, 69 mm tall profile. The PRO 4500 draws 200 W, requires a single 16-pin connector and a 550 W PSU, occupies a dual-slot design, and measures 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. The A400's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface contrasts with the PRO 4500's PCIe 5.0 x16, halving the available lanes and halving the protocol generation on the smaller card.

Display outputs differ in standard: the A400 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, while the PRO 4500 provides four full-size DisplayPort 2.1b connectors. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API coverage is identical despite the hardware gap.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear stratification. The RTX A400 belongs to the entry-level workstation segment, as evidenced by its 35th percentile rank, its 4 GB memory ceiling, and its nearest rivals being integrated graphics and low-end mobile parts. The RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation, with its 50th percentile rank, 32 GB memory, and 10496 shading units, occupies a professional visualization tier that the A400 cannot approach.

The A400's benchmark deltas against its nearest rivals are all within 1 percent, meaning the database shows no meaningful performance separation between the A400 and the GeForce MX230, Quadro P2000, Iris Pro 6200, or Radeon 760M. This suggests the A400 is a baseline entry point for workstation graphics, adequate for basic rendering and compute but not for intensive workloads.

The PRO 4500's lack of recorded benchmark scores prevents a direct numerical verdict. However, the architectural data alone establishes its superiority: 18.7 times the FP32 throughput, 9.3 times the memory bandwidth, 8 times the VRAM, and 13.7 times the shading units. The process node advantage (5 nm versus 8 nm) and transistor density improvement (120.6M versus 43.5M per mm²) indicate a fundamentally more advanced design, not merely a scaled-up version.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The RTX A400 has an average benchmark score of 6078. The RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its average cannot be compared.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, an eight-fold difference.

Q: How do the FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The RTX A400 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation delivers 50.53 TFLOPS, a difference of approximately 18.7 times.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile rank among all GPUs?

A: The RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation ranks at the 50th percentile, while the RTX A400 ranks at the 35th percentile, placing the PRO 4500 above the median and the A400 below it.

Q: What are the process node and foundry for each card?

A: The RTX A400 uses an 8 nm process from Samsung, while the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation uses a 5 nm process from TSMC.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 wins in physical simplicity. Its 50 W power draw requires no external power connector, its single-slot design fits compact chassis, and its 163 mm length and 69 mm height make it suitable for space-constrained systems. The suggested PSU of 250 W means it can slot into pre-existing low-power workstations without infrastructure changes. Its four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor setups at a modest hardware cost.

The RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Workstation wins in every raw performance category recorded. Its 10496 shading units, 82 RT cores, and 328 tensor cores provide the compute foundation for demanding workloads. The 32 GB GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus with 896.0 GB/s bandwidth enables large model loading and high-resolution texture streaming. The 50.53 TFLOPS FP32 throughput handles complex simulations and AI inference at rates the A400 cannot match. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bus bandwidth compared to the A400's PCIe 4.0 x8, reducing data transfer bottlenecks.

The PRO 4500 also wins on display technology, with four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs supporting higher refresh rates and resolutions than the A400's DisplayPort 1.4a. The 200 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU indicate a card designed for full-size workstations with adequate power delivery, while the dual-slot cooler accommodates the higher thermal load.

The A400 wins only where the PRO 4500's advantages are irrelevant: low-power environments, small form factors, and scenarios where 4 GB of memory suffices. The PRO 4500 wins everywhere else, with no recorded benchmark data contradicting this conclusion.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The process node shifts from 8 nm (Samsung) on the A400 to 5 nm (TSMC) on the PRO 4500. Transistor count jumps from 8,700 million to 45,600 million, die size from 200 mm² to 378 mm², and transistor density from 43.5M per mm² to 120.6M per mm².

Clock speeds increase from 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost on the A400 to 1635 MHz base and 2407 MHz boost on the PRO 4500. Memory clocks rise from 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) to 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). Memory size grows from 4 GB GDDR6 to 32 GB GDDR7, bus width from 64 bit to 256 bit, and bandwidth from 96.00 GB/s to 896.0 GB/s.

Core counts differ as follows: shading units from 768 to 10496, TMUs from 24 to 328, ROPs from 16 to 112, RT cores from 6 to 82, and tensor cores from 24 to 328. Pixel rate rises from 28.19 GPixel/s to 269.6 GPixel/s, texture rate from 42.29 GTexel/s to 789.5 GTexel/s, and FP32 from 2.706 TFLOPS to 50.53 TFLOPS. FP16 scales identically to FP32 on both cards.

Power specifications diverge: TDP from 50 W to 200 W, slot width from single-slot to dual-slot, power connectors from none to one 16-pin, and suggested PSU from 250 W to 550 W. Bus interface advances from PCIe 4.0 x8 to PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs change from four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a to four DisplayPort 2.1b.

Physical dimensions: length from 163 mm (6.4 inches) to 267 mm (10.5 inches), height from 69 mm (2.7 inches) to 111 mm (4.4 inches), and width from none recorded to 40 mm (1.6 inches). The release dates differ by nearly a year: 2024-04-15 for the A400 versus 2025-03-17 for the PRO 4500. The A400's predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada; the PRO 4500's predecessor is Workstation Ada and it has no recorded successor. Both cards remain in active production.