NVIDIA RTX A5000 vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 and NVIDIA RTX A5000 are both professional workstation cards built on the same Ampere architecture and GA102 chip, but the recorded benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The A6000 wins 7 out of 9 head-to-head comparisons, with its most significant advantages appearing in compute-heavy and API-modern workloads. The A5000, however, takes two notable victories in legacy DirectX 9 and 2D graphics tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest gap between the two cards appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the A6000 scores 193,937 against the A5000’s 157,905. That is a 22.8% advantage for the A6000, a substantial lead that reflects the higher shading unit count and FP32 throughput of the larger card. A similar pattern emerges in Geekbench Vulkan, where the A6000 posts 164,462 versus 137,828, a 19.3% difference. These two results dominate the overall average benchmark score comparison: the A6000 sits at 44,075 average, while the A5000 trails at 33,622, a gap of roughly 31%.

In the Passmark GPU Compute test, the A6000 again leads decisively with 14,110 points against 12,455, a 13.3% margin. This aligns with the theoretical FP32 figures in the database: the A6000 is rated at 38.71 TFLOPS, while the A5000 is rated at 27.77 TFLOPS. The compute test measures raw number-crunching ability, and the data confirms the A6000’s advantage in that domain.

The DirectX 10 and 11 tests show much smaller margins. In DirectX 10, the A6000 scores 155 versus 153, a 1.3% lead. In DirectX 11, the A6000 wins 191 to 187, a 2.1% edge. These are minor wins, indicating that for older DirectX API workloads, the two cards perform nearly identically. The DirectX 12 test is a perfect tie, with both cards scoring 87. That result suggests that neither card has a meaningful advantage in modern DirectX 12 games or applications, at least within the margin of this particular benchmark.

The Passmark G3D test, which aggregates overall 3D rendering performance, shows a near dead heat. The A6000 scores 22,577, while the A5000 scores 22,541, a delta of just 0.2%. For general 3D scene rendering, the data shows no practical difference between the two cards.

The A5000’s two wins come in less demanding categories. In Passmark DirectX 9, the A5000 scores 251 against the A6000’s 245, a 2.4% advantage. More notably, in the Passmark G2D test, the A5000 scores 1,032 versus 913, an 11.5% lead. The G2D test measures 2D graphics operations, desktop compositing, and basic screen drawing, areas where the A5000’s lower clocks and different resource allocation appear to give it an edge. These wins are real, but they are in workloads that rarely stress a workstation GPU to its limits.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior card for compute-intensive professional workloads. Its wins in OpenCL, Vulkan, and GPU Compute are substantial, ranging from 13.3% to 22.8% over the A5000. For tasks like rendering, simulation, scientific computing, or any workload that leverages general-purpose GPU compute, the A6000 is the clear choice.

The A5000, however, is not without merit. Its 11.5% win in the G2D test and its 2.4% win in DirectX 9 show that for legacy 2D applications or older DirectX-based software, it can outperform the A6000. Additionally, in the DirectX 12 and G3D tests, the two cards are effectively tied, meaning that for standard 3D rendering workloads, users will not see a meaningful difference between the two.

The percentile ranks in the database reinforce this split. The A6000 sits in the 84th percentile among all GPUs, while the A5000 is in the 78th percentile. The A6000’s nearest rivals include the GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (0.9% ahead) and the RTX 4070 Ti (1.6% behind), placing it in high-end consumer territory. The A5000, by contrast, is bracketed by much older or lower-tier cards like the GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB (0.2% behind) and the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (1% ahead), indicating that its average score is closer to mid-range hardware from several generations ago.

For a user whose primary applications are compute-heavy, the A6000’s 48 GB of memory and higher core counts justify its position as the flagship. For a user working mainly in 2D desktop environments or older DirectX 9 software, the A5000 offers a measurable advantage in those specific tests, and its 24 GB of memory is still ample for most workstation tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 has an average benchmark score of 44,075, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 has an average score of 33,622.

Q: In which test does the A5000 have its largest win over the A6000?

A: The A5000’s largest win is in the Passmark G2D test, where it scores 1,032 versus 913, an 11.5% advantage.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the two cards are exactly tied?

A: Yes, in the Passmark DirectX 12 test, both cards score exactly 87.

Q: How much faster is the A6000 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The A6000 scores 193,937 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 22.8% higher than the A5000’s 157,905.

Q: What is the percentile rank of each card among all GPUs?

A: The A6000 is in the 84th percentile, while the A5000 is in the 78th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher Passmark GPU Compute score?

A: The A6000 scores 14,110, which is 13.3% higher than the A5000’s 12,455.

Specification Differences

The two cards share the same GA102 chip, Ampere architecture, 8 nm process node, Samsung foundry, 28,300 million transistors, and 628 mm² die size. They also have identical memory type (GDDR6), bus width (384 bit), and bandwidth (768.0 GB/s). The slot width, bus interface, display outputs, and API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) are the same.

The differences begin with the memory capacity. The A6000 has 48 GB, while the A5000 has 24 GB. The base clock differs: the A6000 runs at 1410 MHz, while the A5000 runs at 1170 MHz. The boost clock also differs, with the A6000 at 1800 MHz and the A5000 at 1695 MHz.

The core configurations diverge significantly. The A6000 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 84 RT cores, and 336 tensor cores. The A5000 has 8,192 shading units, 256 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 64 RT cores, and 256 tensor cores. This translates to a pixel rate of 201.6 GPixel/s for the A6000 versus 162.7 GPixel/s for the A5000, and a texture rate of 604.8 GTexel/s versus 433.9 GTexel/s.

The power requirements also differ. The A6000 has a TDP of 300 W, requires an 8-pin EPS power connector, and suggests a 700 W PSU. The A5000 has a TDP of 230 W, uses a single 8-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The A6000 launched on October 4, 2020, with a launch MSRP of 4,649 USD, while the A5000 launched on April 11, 2021, with no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The transistor count is identical at 28,300 million, and the die size is also identical at 628 mm². The transistor density is 45.1M per mm² for both.

The architectural differences are purely in the number of active units, not in the fundamental design. The A6000 enables more of the GA102 die, with 10,752 shading units versus the A5000’s 8,192. This extends to the RT cores (84 versus 64) and tensor cores (336 versus 256). The A6000 also has more TMUs (336 versus 256) and ROPs (112 versus 96).

The memory subsystem is identical in terms of bus width and bandwidth, but the A6000 doubles the capacity to 48 GB. The memory clock is the same at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The FP16 performance matches the FP32 performance on both cards at a 1:1 ratio, meaning there is no dedicated half-precision boost.

The A6000’s higher boost clock of 1800 MHz versus 1695 MHz, combined with more cores, drives its higher pixel rate (201.6 GPixel/s versus 162.7 GPixel/s) and texture rate (604.8 GTexel/s versus 433.9 GTexel/s). Both cards are end-of-life, share the same Quadro Turing predecessor, and are succeeded by the Workstation Ada generation.

Where Each One Wins

The A6000 wins in every compute-oriented category. Its 22.8% lead in OpenCL and 19.3% lead in Vulkan make it the stronger choice for applications that use these APIs for general-purpose computing, such as machine learning inference, physics simulations, or video encoding. The 13.3% advantage in GPU Compute further cements this position. The A6000 also holds narrow wins in DirectX 10 and DirectX 11, and ties in DirectX 12, so for any modern 3D workload, it is at least equal to the A5000.

The A5000 wins in two specific areas. The 11.5% lead in G2D suggests it handles 2D desktop environments, spreadsheet rendering, and basic UI compositing with more efficiency. The 2.4% win in DirectX 9 indicates that legacy software written for older DirectX versions may run slightly faster on the A5000. These are not typical workstation bottlenecks, but they are measurable differences.

For a professional doing GPU compute, rendering, or any task that pushes the shading units and tensor cores, the A6000 is the clear winner. For a user whose workload is dominated by 2D applications or very old DirectX 9 software, the A5000 offers a small but real performance edge in those tests. In all other scenarios, the data shows the A6000 either wins or matches the A5000, making it the more versatile and powerful card overall.