NVIDIA RTX A4500 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy between these two workstation GPUs. In the two shared benchmark tests, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 wins both, with no tests where the RTX A4500 comes out ahead.

The largest gap appears in Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX A5500 scores 174,637 against the RTX A4500's 141,837. That is a 23.1% advantage for the A5500. In practical terms, OpenCL workloads that scale well with compute throughput will finish noticeably faster on the A5500. This aligns with the raw compute specifications: the A5500 delivers 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the A4500 delivers 23.65 TFLOPS. The delta in FP32 is roughly 44%, but the benchmark delta is smaller at 23.1%, suggesting that memory bandwidth or other bottlenecks temper the theoretical advantage.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though with a slightly narrower margin. The RTX A5500 scores 155,797, while the RTX A4500 scores 129,980. That is a 19.9% difference. Vulkan workloads often stress geometry and rasterization alongside compute, and here the A5500's higher texture rate (532.8 GTexel/s vs 369.6 GTexel/s) and larger memory bus (384 bit vs 320 bit) contribute to the win. The pixel rates are nearly identical (159.8 GPixel/s vs 158.4 GPixel/s), which explains why the gap is not even larger: both cards have the same 96 ROPs and similar boost clocks.

Looking at the broader database context, the RTX A5500 sits at the 97th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A4500 sits at the 93rd percentile. The average benchmark score for the A5500 is 165,217, compared to 91,671 for the A4500. That average includes a wider set of tests beyond the two head-to-head ones, and the large difference reflects the A4500's additional 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result (3,196), which drags its average down relative to its Geekbench scores. The A5500's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 (164,894 average, 0.2% behind), the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166,094 average, 0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X (168,574 average, 2% ahead). The A4500's nearest rivals are mostly lower-tier cards: the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134, 0.6% behind), the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (92,466, 0.9% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87,445, 4.8% behind).

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the RTX A5500 wins both recorded comparisons with double-digit margins. There is no scenario in the database where the A4500 overtakes it.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same fundamental architecture. The RTX A5500 and RTX A4500 are both built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, using the GA102 chip. Both are fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process node, with the same transistor count of 28,300 million and the same die size of 628 mm². The transistor density is identical at 45.1M per mm². This means the underlying silicon is the same; the differences come from how many units are enabled and how the memory subsystem is configured.

The RTX A5500 is the more fully enabled part. It has 10,240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, 80 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores. The RTX A4500 has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 56 RT cores, and 224 tensor cores. That is a significant cut: the A4500 loses roughly 30% of the shading units, TMUs, RT cores, and tensor cores. Both retain 96 ROPs, which is why their pixel fillrates are nearly identical. The A5500's texture rate is 532.8 GTexel/s, while the A4500's is 369.6 GTexel/s, a direct consequence of the higher TMU count.

Clock speeds are close but not identical. The A5500 runs at 1080 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost. The A4500 runs at 1050 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost. The A5500 has a slight edge in both, though the difference is small. The FP32 throughput difference (34.10 TFLOPS vs 23.65 TFLOPS) comes mostly from the extra shading units, not from clocks.

Memory is another major divergence. The RTX A5500 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A4500 has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 640.0 GB/s. Both use 16 Gbps effective memory speed, so the bandwidth difference is purely a function of bus width. For large datasets or memory-heavy workloads, the A5500 offers both more capacity and more bandwidth.

Power and cooling are also different. The RTX A5500 has a 230 W TDP, while the RTX A4500 has a 200 W TDP. Both are dual-slot cards with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 550 W PSU. The higher TDP on the A5500 reflects the additional compute units and memory. Both cards are PCIe 4.0 x16 and output 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. They support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The physical dimensions are identical: 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height. Both are end-of-life products, with the A4500 released on November 22, 2021, and the A5500 released on March 21, 2022. Both share the same predecessor (Quadro Turing) and successor (Workstation Ada) in the product line.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the RTX A5500 is the faster card in every recorded benchmark, and it offers substantially more compute and memory resources. If you need maximum performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the A5500 is the clear choice. The 23.1% OpenCL lead and 19.9% Vulkan lead are decisive margins, not edge cases.

The RTX A4500 is not a bad card; it sits at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs and beats rivals like the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 by 4.8% and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 by 5.2% in average score. But it is objectively slower than the A5500 in every shared test. The A4500's average benchmark score of 91,671 is dragged down by its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result, but even its better Geekbench scores (141,837 OpenCL, 129,980 Vulkan) fall well short of the A5500's.

For users deciding between these two, the choice hinges on workload requirements. The A5500 offers 24 GB of memory versus 20 GB, 34.10 TFLOPS versus 23.65 TFLOPS, and 768.0 GB/s versus 640.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Those are meaningful differences for GPU-heavy tasks like rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference. The A4500's lower 200 W TDP might be easier to cool in a compact workstation, but the A5500's 230 W TDP is not extreme either. Both use the same power connector and PSU recommendation.

The verdict is simple: pick the RTX A5500 if the budget allows and the extra performance matters. Pick the RTX A4500 only if the workload is light enough that the A5500's advantages go unused, or if power draw is a hard constraint. The benchmark data does not show any scenario where the A4500 wins.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 is faster, scoring 174,637 versus 141,837 for the RTX A4500, a 23.1% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX A5500 scores 155,797 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the RTX A4500 scores 129,980. The A5500 leads by 19.9%.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory type?

A: Yes, both use GDDR6 memory at 16 Gbps effective speed. The difference is capacity and bus width: the A5500 has 24 GB on a 384-bit bus (768.0 GB/s), the A4500 has 20 GB on a 320-bit bus (640.0 GB/s).

Q: Are the GPU architectures the same?

A: Yes, both are based on the Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process with 28,300 million transistors and a 628 mm² die.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The RTX A5500 has a 230 W TDP, while the RTX A4500 has a 200 W TDP. Both are dual-slot cards with a single 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more RT cores and tensor cores?

A: The RTX A5500 has 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores. The RTX A4500 has 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A5500 wins in every recorded benchmark category. The data shows two direct comparisons: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, both won by the A5500 with margins of 23.1% and 19.9% respectively. There are no tests in the database where the RTX A4500 outperforms the RTX A5500.

For compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL, the A5500 is the stronger choice. The 23.1% lead in that test aligns with its higher FP32 throughput (34.10 TFLOPS vs 23.65 TFLOPS) and larger memory bandwidth (768.0 GB/s vs 640.0 GB/s). If a task is memory-bound, the A5500's wider 384-bit bus gives it a structural advantage that the A4500 cannot overcome.

For graphics or compute tasks that use Vulkan, the A5500 still leads, but the margin is slightly smaller at 19.9%. The near-identical pixel rates (159.8 GPixel/s vs 158.4 GPixel/s) suggest that rasterization-heavy workloads will see a smaller gap, while texture-heavy workloads will favor the A5500 due to its 532.8 GTexel/s texture rate versus 369.6 GTexel/s.

The RTX A4500's wins are relative to its own rivals, not to the A5500. It beats the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile by 0.6%, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 by 0.9%, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 by 4.8%, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 by 5.2% in average score. If you are comparing the A4500 against those cards, it is the better pick. Against the A5500, it cannot compete.

The A5500 also holds up well against its own rivals. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB in average score. It trails the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation by 0.5% and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X by 2%. So the A5500 is not just better than the A4500; it is competitive with newer or more expensive workstation GPUs.

In short: the RTX A5500 wins on raw performance, memory capacity, and bandwidth. The RTX A4500 wins only on lower power draw (200 W vs 230 W) and, presumably, a lower price point if that matters, though the database does not record pricing for either card.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specifications:

• Memory size: 24 GB (A5500) vs 20 GB (A4500)
• Memory bus width: 384 bit (A5500) vs 320 bit (A4500)
• Memory bandwidth: 768.0 GB/s (A5500) vs 640.0 GB/s (A4500)
• Shading units: 10,240 (A5500) vs 7,168 (A4500)
• TMUs: 320 (A5500) vs 224 (A4500)
• RT cores: 80 (A5500) vs 56 (A4500)
• Tensor cores: 320 (A5500) vs 224 (A4500)
• Texture rate: 532.8 GTexel/s (A5500) vs 369.6 GTexel/s (A4500)
• FP32 performance: 34.10 TFLOPS (A5500) vs 23.65 TFLOPS (A4500)
• FP16 performance: 34.10 TFLOPS (A5500) vs 23.65 TFLOPS (A4500)
• Base clock: 1080 MHz (A5500) vs 1050 MHz (A4500)
• Boost clock: 1665 MHz (A5500) vs 1650 MHz (A4500)
• TDP: 230 W (A5500) vs 200 W (A4500)
• Release date: March 21, 2022 (A5500) vs November 22, 2021 (A4500)

The specifications that are identical include the chip (GA102), architecture (Ampere), process node (8 nm Samsung), foundry (Samsung), transistor count (28,300 million), die size (628 mm²), transistor density (45.1M / mm²), ROPs (96), pixel rate (roughly 159-160 GPixel/s), memory type (GDDR6), memory speed (16 Gbps effective), slot width (Dual-slot), power connector (1x 8-pin), suggested PSU (550 W), bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x16), display outputs (4x DisplayPort 1.4a), APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and physical dimensions (267 mm length, 112 mm height). Both are end-of-life products with the same predecessor and successor in the product line.