NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB across both benchmark applications, with the largest margin appearing in the Vulkan workload. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB scores 87,454 points against 66,696 points for the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, a 31.1% delta. That is a substantial performance gap, but it is the Vulkan result that truly separates the two: the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB reaches 141,336 points, while the TITAN X Pascal trails at 77,499 points, an 82.4% advantage for the Volta-based card.

The 82.4% Vulkan delta is the dominant headline in this comparison. It indicates not just a generational step but a fundamental shift in how the architectures handle the workload. The OpenCL margin, while smaller, is still significant: a 31.1% lead means the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB completes roughly 31% more work per unit time in that API. Both benchmarks point in the same direction, and the database records two wins for the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB and zero for the TITAN X Pascal.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the scale of these margins. The Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 114,395. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile, averages 113,944, a negligible 0.4% difference. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is 3.3% behind at 110,725. The TITAN X Pascal, by contrast, holds the 91st percentile with an average score of 72,098, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, is effectively tied at 72,379 (0.4% lower). The V100's average score is roughly 58% higher than the TITAN X Pascal's average, a gap that dwarfs the differences within each card's own competitive cluster.

The head-to-head numbers are unambiguous, but they deserve a closer look at what drives them. The Vulkan test rewards the V100's compute-oriented design, while the OpenCL test, though closer, still shows a commanding lead. No benchmark in the database favors the TITAN X Pascal, and the delta in Vulkan is nearly triple the delta in OpenCL. This pattern suggests the V100's advantage grows with workload complexity and API efficiency, which is consistent with its architecture positioning.

Where Each One Wins

The database records no benchmark wins for the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal in this direct comparison, so the use-case split is heavily one-sided. However, the nature of the wins matters more than the count. The Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB wins in Geekbench OpenCL with 87,454 versus 66,696, a 31.1% margin that places it in a different performance tier. It also wins in Geekbench Vulkan with 141,336 versus 77,499, an 82.4% margin that is among the largest recorded for any head-to-head pairing in this segment.

For compute-heavy applications that leverage OpenCL, the V100 offers a 31.1% throughput advantage. For Vulkan-based workloads, whether they are compute tasks or graphics pipelines that use the Vulkan API, the V100 more than doubles the effective performance of the TITAN X Pascal. The TITAN X Pascal, despite its 91st percentile standing and strong absolute scores, simply does not have a use case in this comparison where it emerges ahead.

The TITAN X Pascal's closest rival data shows it is competitive within its own class: it is 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M and 1.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, while sitting 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 and 1.7% behind the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. Those are tight margins, indicating the TITAN X Pascal is well-balanced against its direct peers. But the V100's peers are a different story: it is 0.4% ahead of the RTX A5500 Mobile, 2.3% behind the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, 2.6% behind the NVIDIA GB10, and 3.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900. The V100 operates in a higher performance band entirely.

In practical terms, the V100 is the choice for any workload that can use HBM2 memory bandwidth and tensor core acceleration. The TITAN X Pascal, with its GDDR5X memory and no tensor cores, remains a capable card for its era, but the data shows it cannot match the V100 in either of the two tested APIs. For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL or Vulkan, the V100 is the only option that wins.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and manufacturing nodes, which explains the performance gap. The Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB uses the GV100 chip built on a 12 nm process at TSMC, while the TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. The V100 packs 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.9 million per mm². The TITAN X Pascal has 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, a density of 25.1 million per mm². The V100 has nearly double the transistor count and a 73% larger die, but the density figures are similar, indicating the 12 nm node provides only a modest density advantage.

Memory is where the architectures diverge most sharply. The V100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 897.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 480.4 GB/s. That is an 86.7% bandwidth advantage for the V100, which directly feeds its Vulkan performance. The memory clock rates differ: the V100 runs at 876 MHz (1752 Mbps effective), while the TITAN X Pascal runs at 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective). The GDDR5X runs faster per pin, but the HBM2's wider bus and higher total throughput win decisively.

Compute resources also favor the V100. It has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, versus 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs on the TITAN X Pascal. The V100 also includes 640 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the TITAN X Pascal. The pixel rate for the V100 is 195.8 GPixel/s against 147.0 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 489.6 GTexel/s against 342.9 GTexel/s. In FP32, the V100 reaches 15.67 TFLOPS versus 10.97 TFLOPS, a 42.8% lead. The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided: the V100 delivers 31.33 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the TITAN X Pascal manages only 171.5 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio. That is a 182-fold difference in FP16 throughput, a direct result of the tensor core design.

Clock speeds are close: the V100 has a base of 1312 MHz and a boost of 1530 MHz, while the TITAN X Pascal has a base of 1417 MHz and a boost of 1531 MHz. The TITAN X Pascal actually runs a higher base clock, but the V100's architectural advantages overwhelm this. Both cards have a 250 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The slot form factors differ: the V100 is an SXM Module with no display outputs and no power connectors, while the TITAN X Pascal is a dual-slot card with 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, powered by 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors. The TITAN X Pascal measures 267 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The V100 is classified under the Tesla Volta generation with a predecessor of Tesla Pascal and a successor of Tesla Turing. The TITAN X Pascal is in the GeForce 10 generation, with a predecessor of GeForce 900 and a successor of GeForce 20. The V100 was released in June 2017, the TITAN X Pascal in August 2016, roughly ten months earlier. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB delivers 15.67 TFLOPS, which is 42.8% higher than the 10.97 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The V100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus with 897.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 480.4 GB/s bandwidth. The V100 has 86.7% more bandwidth.

Q: Does the TITAN X Pascal have tensor cores?

A: No, the TITAN X Pascal has no tensor cores. The V100 has 640 tensor cores, which enables its FP16 throughput of 31.33 TFLOPS versus the TITAN X Pascal's 171.5 GFLOPS.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each card?

A: The V100 is at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 114,395. The TITAN X Pascal is at the 91st percentile, with an average score of 72,098.

Q: Which card has a higher Vulkan benchmark score?

A: The V100 scores 141,336 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 82.4% higher than the TITAN X Pascal's 77,499.

Q: Are the power requirements different?

A: Both cards have a 250 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The V100 is an SXM Module with no power connectors, while the TITAN X Pascal uses 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB is the superior card in every recorded test. It wins Geekbench OpenCL by 31.1% and Geekbench Vulkan by 82.4%, and it holds a higher percentile rank (95th versus 91st) with an average score of 114,395 versus 72,098. For any workload that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan, the V100 is the correct choice.

The TITAN X Pascal is not without merit, but its merits are relative to its own generation. It is competitive with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, all within 1.8% of its average score. It offers display outputs, a dual-slot form factor, and a 1,199 USD launch MSRP, features that suit a workstation or desktop use case. However, the database records no benchmark where it beats the V100.

The V100's advantages are structural: 640 tensor cores, HBM2 memory with 897.0 GB/s bandwidth, 5,120 shading units, and a 12 nm process with 21,100 million transistors. These translate directly into the 82.4% Vulkan lead and the 31.1% OpenCL lead. The TITAN X Pascal's higher base clock (1417 MHz versus 1312 MHz) does not compensate for the V100's wider memory bus and compute resources.

Users who need maximum compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan should select the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB. Users who require display outputs, a standard PCIe slot card, or a 12 GB GDDR5X configuration may consider the TITAN X Pascal, but they should do so knowing that the data shows a significant performance deficit. The V100 is the clear winner in this head-to-head comparison, and the margin in Vulkan is among the largest the database records for any pairing in this performance class.