NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 records an average benchmark score of 165217, while the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile averages 91134. The A5500 sits at the 97th percentile among all GPUs, compared to the 93rd percentile for the A4500 Mobile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A5500 scores 174637 against 105307 for the A4500 Mobile, a 65.8% advantage. This is the larger of the two recorded differences between the cards.

Q: Does the RTX A4500 Mobile win any recorded benchmark?

A: No. Across the two head-to-head tests in the database, the A4500 Mobile wins zero tests. The A5500 wins both, with a 102.4% delta in Vulkan and a 65.8% delta in OpenCL.

Q: Are these GPUs built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both use an 8 nm process at Samsung. The A5500 uses the GA102 chip with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, while the A4500 Mobile uses the GA104 chip with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card according to the database?

A: For the RTX A5500, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, with a delta of 0.2%. For the RTX A4500 Mobile, the nearest rival is the desktop NVIDIA RTX A4500, with a delta of -0.6%.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Their API feature sets are identical in the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the Ampere architecture and the same 8 nm Samsung process, but they are built around different chips. The RTX A5500 uses the GA102 die, while the RTX A4500 Mobile uses the GA104 die. This distinction drives nearly every architectural difference between them.

The GA102 chip in the A5500 packs 28,300 million transistors across a 628 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The GA104 in the A4500 Mobile contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, with a density of 44.4 million per mm². The A5500 therefore has roughly 63% more transistors, giving it substantially more compute hardware to draw upon.

The A5500 fields 10240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The A4500 Mobile counters with 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Both share the same ROP count, but the A5500 has 74% more shading units and 74% more texture units. Ray tracing and tensor hardware follow the same pattern: the A5500 has 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores, while the A4500 Mobile has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores.

Clock behavior differs as well. The A5500 runs at a 1080 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost, while the A4500 Mobile runs at 930 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The A5500's higher boost clock of 1665 MHz, combined with its larger shader array, explains why its theoretical FP32 throughput reaches 34.10 TFLOPS, nearly double the 17.66 TFLOPS of the A4500 Mobile. FP16 throughput is identical to FP32 on both cards at a 1:1 ratio.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The A5500 uses a 384-bit memory bus with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory, yielding 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A4500 Mobile uses a 256-bit bus with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, yielding 512.0 GB/s. Both run their memory at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer, so the bandwidth difference comes entirely from bus width and capacity.

Power delivery and physical design also separate the two. The A5500 draws up to 230 W, uses a dual-slot cooler, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and needs a 550 W suggested power supply. The A4500 Mobile is rated at 140 W, has no power connectors (it draws power through the mobile platform), and has no suggested PSU rating. The A5500 measures 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height, while the A4500 Mobile has no listed physical dimensions because it is a mobile part.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear split: the RTX A5500 wins every test in the database, and the RTX A4500 Mobile wins none. That said, the magnitude of the wins differs by workload, which is worth examining.

In OpenCL, the A5500 leads by 65.8%. This test generally reflects raw compute throughput, and the A5500's larger shader count, higher clocks, and wider memory bus all contribute. For users running compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, simulation, or data processing, the A5500 is the stronger choice by a wide margin.

In Vulkan, the A5500 leads by 102.4%, meaning it more than doubles the A4500 Mobile's score. Vulkan workloads often stress graphics pipeline throughput and memory bandwidth. The A5500's 768.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 512.0 GB/s, plus its 96 ROPs and 320 TMUs, give it a decisive edge in geometry-heavy or bandwidth-sensitive graphics tasks.

The A4500 Mobile's only structural advantage is mobility itself. It is a 140 W mobile part with no external power connectors, designed to fit into portable workstations. Its 16 GB of memory is still substantial, and its 17.66 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is respectable for a laptop GPU. But in every measured performance category, the A5500 is ahead, often by large margins.

The percentile data reinforces this. The A5500 sits at the 97th percentile among all GPUs, while the A4500 Mobile sits at the 93rd percentile. Both are high-performing workstation parts, but the A5500 is in a higher tier.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: GA102 (A5500) vs GA104 (A4500 Mobile)
• Generation: Workstation Ampere (Ax000) vs Ampere-MW (Ax000)
• Transistors: 28,300 million vs 17,400 million
• Die size: 628 mm² vs 392 mm²
• Transistor density: 45.1M / mm² vs 44.4M / mm²
• Base clock: 1080 MHz vs 930 MHz
• Boost clock: 1665 MHz vs 1500 MHz
• Memory size: 24 GB vs 16 GB
• Memory bus width: 384 bit vs 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 768.0 GB/s vs 512.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 10240 vs 5888
• TMUs: 320 vs 184
• RT cores: 80 vs 46
• Tensor cores: 320 vs 184
• Pixel rate: 159.8 GPixel/s vs 144.0 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 532.8 GTexel/s vs 276.0 GTexel/s
• FP32: 34.10 TFLOPS vs 17.66 TFLOPS
• FP16: 34.10 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 17.66 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 230 W vs 140 W
• Slot width: Dual-slot vs not specified
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin vs None
• Suggested PSU: 550 W vs not specified
• Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 1.4a vs Portable Device Dependent
• Dimensions: 267 mm x 112 mm vs not specified
• Predecessor: Quadro Turing vs Quadro Turing-M
• Successor: Workstation Ada vs Ada-MW

Fields that are identical include the 8 nm Samsung process, GDDR6 memory type, 2000 MHz memory clock with 16 Gbps effective speed, 96 ROPs, PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and the release date of 2022-03-21. Both are also marked end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these GPUs, both in Geekbench workloads.

The first is Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX A5500 scores 174637, while the RTX A4500 Mobile scores 105307. The A5500 wins by 65.8%. This is a substantial gap that aligns with the raw compute specifications: the A5500 has 10240 shading units versus 5888, a 1665 MHz boost versus 1500 MHz, and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 512.0 GB/s. The FP32 throughput difference, 34.10 TFLOPS versus 17.66 TFLOPS, also tracks closely with the OpenCL delta.

The second is Geekbench Vulkan. Here the A5500 scores 155797, and the A4500 Mobile scores 76960. The delta is 102.4%, meaning the A5500 achieves more than double the score. This is the largest relative win for the A5500 in the recorded data. Vulkan performance depends heavily on memory bandwidth and geometry throughput, both of which favor the A5500. Its 768.0 GB/s bandwidth is exactly 50% higher than the A4500 Mobile's 512.0 GB/s, and its texture rate of 532.8 GTexel/s is nearly double the 276.0 GTexel/s of the mobile part.

The aggregate averages reinforce the pattern. The A5500 has an average benchmark score of 165217, and the A4500 Mobile has an average of 91134. That is a difference of roughly 81%. The A5500's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 at 164894 (0.2% delta), the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation at 166094 (-0.5% delta), the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB at 162504 (1.7% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X at 168574 (-2% delta). The A4500 Mobile's nearest rivals are the desktop NVIDIA RTX A4500 at 91671 (-0.6% delta), the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 at 92466 (-1.4% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87445 (4.2% delta), and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 at 87108 (4.6% delta).

Notably, the desktop RTX A4500 scores 91671, which is within 0.6% of the A4500 Mobile's 91134. This suggests the mobile part performs nearly identically to its desktop namesake in average terms, despite the different power envelope. The A5500, by contrast, sits far above both.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX A5500 is the stronger GPU in every recorded measurement. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 97th percentile ranking versus 93rd for the A4500 Mobile, and delivers an average benchmark score of 165217 against 91134.

For workstation users who need maximum compute throughput, the A5500 is the clear choice. Its 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 24 GB of memory, and 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth place it in a different performance tier. The 65.8% OpenCL lead and the 102.4% Vulkan lead leave little room for ambiguity. Anyone running GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, or large dataset processing should select the A5500 if form factor allows.

The RTX A4500 Mobile is the appropriate pick only when mobility is the deciding factor. It is a 140 W mobile part with no external power connectors, designed for laptops and portable workstations. Its 16 GB of memory and 17.66 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput are still respectable, and its 93rd percentile ranking shows it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database. But it is not competitive with the A5500 in raw performance.

The benchmark deltas are consistent across both test types, which strengthens the conclusion. The A5500 does not merely win in one workload; it wins by a wide margin in both compute-oriented OpenCL and graphics-oriented Vulkan. There is no recorded scenario where the A4500 Mobile takes the lead.

Users should also note the closest rival data. The A5500 trades blows with the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation, both within 0.5% of its average score. The A4500 Mobile, by contrast, is nearly tied with the desktop RTX A4500 and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60. This means the mobile part is not just slower than the A5500; it occupies a different competitive bracket entirely.

In short, the A5500 is for fixed workstations that demand maximum performance. The A4500 Mobile is for professionals who need Ampere-class workstation features in a portable chassis and are willing to accept roughly half the compute throughput. The recorded data offers no scenario where the A4500 Mobile outperforms the A5500.