NVIDIA RTX A400 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server Comparison
NVIDIA RTX A400
RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: NVIDIA RTX A400 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server
The NVIDIA RTX A400 and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server represent two radically different endpoints in the professional GPU spectrum. The A400 is a low-power entry point into NVIDIA’s workstation Ampere lineup, while the PRO 6000 is a monolithic server-class Blackwell part. Benchmark data, however, presents a surprising twist: the two cards land in nearly the same percentile tier, with the A400 holding a slight edge in average score. This analysis breaks down the raw numbers, architectural chasms, and practical implications of these two very different accelerators.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The most critical data point is the average benchmark score. The RTX A400 achieves an average score of 6078, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server posts a figure of 5996. This puts the A400 approximately 1.4% ahead of the PRO 6000 in aggregate performance metrics, despite the latter having vastly superior theoretical specifications. The A400’s percentile ranking among all GPUs is 35, slightly higher than the PRO 6000’s 34th percentile.
Looking at the A400’s individual benchmark runs, it shows consistent results across different API tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 22844, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 22237. Its Passmark G3D score is 5983, with a GPU compute score of 2557. The A400’s DirectX legacy performance shows scores of 87 in DX9, 37 in DX11, 32 in DX10, and 27 in DX12, alongside a 2D score of 899.
The RTX PRO 6000 has a single benchmark entry: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it scores 5996. This is the only data point driving its average, making direct comparisons difficult. The PRO 6000’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, scores 6000, a delta of -0.1%, while the A400’s closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, scores 6077, essentially a 0% delta. The data suggests that in the limited tests available, the A400 is the more consistent performer across a broader suite of workloads, whereas the PRO 6000’s single result anchors it to a specific DX12 scenario.
Where Each One Wins
The A400 wins decisively in benchmark variety and consistency. It has scores across nine different tests, spanning OpenCL, Vulkan, and multiple DirectX versions, as well as 2D and compute workloads. This indicates a versatile card that can handle legacy APIs and modern interfaces alike. Its Passmark G2D score of 899 suggests strong 2D desktop rendering capability. For users running mixed workloads or older software stacks, the A400’s driver support across these APIs is a clear advantage.
The RTX PRO 6000’s single benchmark win is in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which is a modern, demanding workload. While its score of 5996 is slightly lower than the A400’s average, this test is specifically designed for high-end DX12 graphics cards. The PRO 6000’s architecture is built for massive parallel throughput, so in scenarios that scale with shading units and memory bandwidth, it should excel. However, the FACT PACK provides no additional benchmark data to confirm this. The A400 wins in the breadth of tested scenarios, while the PRO 6000’s strength is implied by its architectural design, not by the available benchmark scores.
Architecture Differences
The architectural gap between these two is immense. The A400 uses the GA107 chip, based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The PRO 6000 uses the GB202 chip, based on Blackwell 2.0, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. This chip packs 92,200 million transistors onto a 750 mm² die, achieving a density of 122.9M per mm². The PRO 6000 has over ten times the transistor count.
Memory configurations are equally divergent. The A400 features 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The PRO 6000 offers 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth—an order of magnitude higher. Clock speeds also differ: the A400 runs at 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost, while the PRO 6000 runs at 1590 MHz base and boosts to 2617 MHz.
Compute resources show a similar scale of difference. The A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores. The PRO 6000 has 24064 shading units, 752 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 188 RT cores, and 752 tensor cores. This translates to FP32 performance of 2.706 TFLOPS for the A400 versus 126.0 TFLOPS for the PRO 6000. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: 28.19 GPixel/s and 42.29 GTexel/s for the A400, versus 502.5 GPixel/s and 1,968.0 GTexel/s for the PRO 6000.
Power and physical dimensions are starkly different as well. The A400 has a 50 W TDP with no power connectors and requires a 250 W PSU. It is a single-slot card measuring 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The PRO 6000 has a 600 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin connector, and requires a 1000 W PSU. It is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The A400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the PRO 6000 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on the A400 versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b on the PRO 6000.
FAQ
Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?
A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 has an average benchmark score of 6078, which is higher than the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server’s average of 5996.
Q: Are these cards in the same performance tier?
A: Yes, based on percentile rankings, they are close. The A400 is in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the PRO 6000 is in the 34th percentile.
Q: What is the memory capacity difference?
A: The A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the PRO 6000 has 96 GB of GDDR7 memory.
Q: How do their power requirements compare?
A: The A400 has a 50 W TDP and suggests a 250 W PSU, whereas the PRO 6000 has a 600 W TDP and suggests a 1000 W PSU.
Q: Which card has more RT cores?
A: The RTX PRO 6000 has 188 RT cores, while the RTX A400 has only 6 RT cores.
Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?
A: The A400 uses an 8 nm process from Samsung, while the PRO 6000 uses a 5 nm process from TSMC.
Specification Differences
The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The chip is GA107 for the A400 versus GB202 for the PRO 6000. The architecture is Ampere versus Blackwell 2.0. The process node is 8 nm versus 5 nm, with transistor counts of 8,700 million versus 92,200 million and die sizes of 200 mm² versus 750 mm².
Clock speeds differ, with the A400 at 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost, and the PRO 6000 at 1590 MHz base and 2617 MHz boost. Memory is 4 GB GDDR6 versus 96 GB GDDR7, with bus widths of 64 bit versus 512 bit and bandwidths of 96.00 GB/s versus 1.79 TB/s.
Shading units are 768 versus 24064, TMUs are 24 versus 752, and ROPs are 16 versus 192. RT cores are 6 versus 188, and tensor cores are 24 versus 752. Pixel rates are 28.19 GPixel/s versus 502.5 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 42.29 GTexel/s versus 1,968.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.706 TFLOPS versus 126.0 TFLOPS.
TDP is 50 W versus 600 W. Slot width is single-slot versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 1000 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a versus 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. Dimensions are 163 mm x 69 mm versus 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm. Release dates are 2024-04-15 versus 2025-03-17.