NVIDIA RTX A5500 vs NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A5500 and NVIDIA Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB represent two distinct generations of NVIDIA's professional computing strategy. The RTX A5500 is an Ampere-generation workstation card designed for interactive graphics and rendering, while the Tesla V100 is a Volta-generation compute accelerator aimed at data center workloads. The benchmark data shows the RTX A5500 leading in both recorded tests, but the Tesla V100's unique memory configuration and tensor core count make it a specialized tool. This analysis breaks down where each card wins, their architectural differences, and what the numbers mean for a potential buyer.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A5500 wins decisively in the two recorded benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 174,637 against the Tesla V100's 168,763, a 3.5% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens dramatically: the A5500 scores 155,797 versus 131,847, a 18.2% lead. This Vulkan result is the clearest differentiator between the two cards. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API, and the A5500's architecture is built around modern graphics features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and hardware ray tracing. The Tesla V100, with no ray tracing cores and a DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level, simply cannot compete in this workload.

The Tesla V100 does not win any of the head-to-head benchmarks. However, the data shows its strengths lie elsewhere. It has a 32 GB HBM2 memory pool on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 897.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This exceeds the A5500's 768.0 GB/s. For compute tasks that are memory-bandwidth bound—such as large matrix operations or data processing—the V100's memory subsystem is the superior specification. Its 640 tensor cores also outnumber the A5500's 320, suggesting a theoretical advantage in certain AI inference workloads, though the A5500's newer tensor core design may offset this in practice.

The practical split is clear: the A5500 wins for graphics, rendering, and any workload leveraging modern APIs or ray tracing. The Tesla V100 wins for massive memory capacity and raw memory bandwidth, making it a candidate for specific scientific computing or large-scale data tasks where 32 GB of HBM2 is essential.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The RTX A5500 uses the GA102 chip on the Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It packs 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². The Tesla V100 uses the GV100 chip on the Volta architecture, built on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It has 21,100 million transistors spread across a larger 815 mm² die, with a lower density of 25.9M per mm².

The memory architectures diverge sharply. The A5500 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, running at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The V100 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a massive 4096-bit bus, running at 876 MHz with 1752 Mbps effective speed. Despite the V100's lower clock, its wider bus delivers higher bandwidth: 897.0 GB/s versus 768.0 GB/s.

Compute resources tell a story of different design goals. The A5500 has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The V100 has half the shading units at 5,120, but the same 320 TMUs and more ROPs at 128. The A5500 includes 80 ray tracing cores, while the V100 has none. Tensor core counts invert: the V100 has 640, double the A5500's 320. The A5500 achieves 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 and 34.10 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The V100 delivers 14.13 TFLOPS FP32 and 28.26 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio).

Clock speeds also differ. The A5500 runs at a 1080 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost. The V100 runs higher at 1230 MHz base but boosts lower to 1380 MHz. The A5500's higher boost clock and double FP32 throughput make it a faster general-purpose compute card despite the V100's higher base clock.

Feature sets reflect their intended markets. The A5500 has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and supports PCIe 4.0 x16. The V100 has no display outputs and uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The A5500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the V100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in graphics workloads?

A: The RTX A5500. It wins the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark by 18.2% (155,797 vs 131,847) and also leads in OpenCL by 3.5% (174,637 vs 168,763).

Q: Does the Tesla V100 have any advantage in memory?

A: Yes, it has 32 GB of HBM2 versus the A5500's 24 GB of GDDR6, and its memory bandwidth is higher at 897.0 GB/s compared to 768.0 GB/s.

Q: Which card has more tensor cores?

A: The Tesla V100 has 640 tensor cores, double the RTX A5500's 320 tensor cores.

Q: Can the Tesla V100 output video to a display?

A: No, the Tesla V100 has no display outputs. The RTX A5500 has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX A5500 delivers 34.10 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than double the Tesla V100's 14.13 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Which card supports newer PCIe technology?

A: The RTX A5500 supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Tesla V100 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every major specification. The process node is 8 nm for the A5500 versus 12 nm for the V100. Transistor counts are 28,300 million versus 21,100 million, with die sizes of 628 mm² and 815 mm² respectively. The A5500 has a higher boost clock at 1665 MHz versus 1380 MHz, but the V100 has a higher base clock at 1230 MHz versus 1080 MHz.

Memory configurations are completely different: 24 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus versus 32 GB HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus. Bandwidth favors the V100 at 897.0 GB/s versus 768.0 GB/s. Shading units favor the A5500 at 10,240 versus 5,120. ROPs favor the V100 at 128 versus 96. TMUs are equal at 320. Ray tracing cores exist only on the A5500 (80), while tensor cores favor the V100 (640 vs 320).

FP32 throughput is 34.10 TFLOPS on the A5500 versus 14.13 TFLOPS on the V100. FP16 throughput is 34.10 TFLOPS on the A5500 (1:1 ratio) versus 28.26 TFLOPS on the V100 (2:1 ratio). Pixel rates are close: 159.8 GPixel/s for the A5500 versus 176.6 GPixel/s for the V100. Texture rates differ: 532.8 GTexel/s versus 441.6 GTexel/s.

Power requirements are similar but not identical. The A5500 has a 230 W TDP and requires one 8-pin connector, with a 550 W suggested PSU. The V100 has a 250 W TDP, requires two 8-pin connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU. Both are dual-slot cards. The A5500 is 267 mm long and 112 mm tall, while the V100 has no listed dimensions. The A5500 uses PCIe 4.0 x16; the V100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs exist only on the A5500.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a close contest. The RTX A5500 scores 174,637 against the Tesla V100's 168,763. The 3.5% delta is modest, indicating that in raw compute throughput, the two cards are within striking distance. This makes sense given the A5500's higher FP32 throughput, but the V100's higher memory bandwidth and additional tensor cores help close the gap. For general compute tasks that scale well across different architectures, this result suggests the A5500 has a slight edge, but the V100 is not far behind.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is a different story entirely. The A5500 scores 155,797, while the V100 manages only 131,847. The 18.2% delta is significant and points to a fundamental architectural advantage for the A5500 in modern graphics APIs. Vulkan leverages features like async compute and explicit multi-GPU, and the Ampere architecture's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and hardware ray tracing gives it a substantial edge. The V100, designed primarily for compute, lacks these graphics-focused capabilities. This benchmark is the clearest evidence that the A5500 is the better choice for any graphics-intensive workload.

The average benchmark scores reflect this overall picture. The A5500 has an average benchmark score of 165,217, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs. The V100's average is 150,305, placing it in the 96th percentile. The A5500's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 (0.2% higher score) and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (0.5% lower score). The V100's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA A10G (1.1% lower score) and the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X (6.5% higher score). These relative positions show that while both cards are at the top of the performance spectrum, the A5500 sits in a slightly more competitive and higher-performing bracket.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most use cases: the NVIDIA RTX A5500. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, including a dominant 18.2% lead in Vulkan. It offers more than double the FP32 throughput, modern PCIe 4.0 support, display outputs, and ray tracing capability. For anyone doing graphics work, rendering, or running workloads that use modern APIs, the A5500 is the superior choice. Its 97th percentile ranking against all GPUs, with an average score of 165,217, confirms its position as a top-tier workstation card.

The Tesla V100 PCIe 32 GB is a different tool. It wins no benchmarks in this comparison, and its 96th percentile ranking with an average score of 150,305 places it slightly lower. However, its 32 GB of HBM2 memory and 897.0 GB/s bandwidth are unmatched by the A5500. For specific scientific computing tasks that require massive memory capacity or are heavily memory-bandwidth bound, the V100's memory subsystem is a genuine advantage. Its 640 tensor cores also suggest a role in certain AI workloads, though the A5500's newer architecture may compensate with more efficient tensor operations.

The choice comes down to workload. Pick the RTX A5500 for graphics, rendering, and general compute. Pick the Tesla V100 only if you specifically need 32 GB of memory or its unique HBM2 bandwidth profile. For virtually all interactive or graphics-adjacent tasks, the A5500's superior Vulkan performance and modern feature set make it the practical recommendation.