NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs NVIDIA RTX A4000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and NVIDIA RTX A4000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
- 2.2x more core clock speed: 1635 MHz vs 735 MHz
- Around 36% higher boost clock speed: 2115 MHz vs 1560 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 5 nm vs 8 nm
- 2.8x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 140 Watt
- Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective vs 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective)
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 1113 vs 1026
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1635 MHz vs 735 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2115 MHz vs 1560 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm vs 8 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 140 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective vs 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 1113 vs 1026 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA RTX A4000
- Around 48% higher texture fill rate: 299.5 GTexel/s vs 203.0 GTexel/s
- 2x more pipelines: 6144 vs 3072
- 2x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 8 GB
- Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 19545 vs 17402
- Around 52% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 121768 vs 79941
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 299.5 GTexel/s vs 203.0 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 6144 vs 3072 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 8 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 19545 vs 17402 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 121768 vs 79941 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
GPU 2: NVIDIA RTX A4000
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | NVIDIA RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 1113 | 1026 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 17402 | 19545 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 79941 | 121768 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 420.465 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4156.52 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 32.297 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 162.131 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1895.111 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22050 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22050 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2604 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | NVIDIA RTX A4000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Ampere |
| Code name | AD107 | GA104 |
| Place in performance rating | 50 | 108 |
| Launch date | 12 Apr 2021 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 2115 MHz | 1560 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1635 MHz | 735 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 8 nm |
| Pipelines | 3072 | 6144 |
| Pixel fill rate | 67.68 GPixel/s | 149.8 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate | 203.0 GTexel/s | 299.5 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 140 Watt |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 599.0 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 19.17 TFLOPS | |
| Transistor count | 17400 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Form factor | IGP | Single-slot |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 241 mm (9.5 inches) | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 300 Watt | |
| Width | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12.2 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 448 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation with others
NVIDIARTX 2000 Ada Generation vs
AMDRadeon RX 6700 XT
NVIDIARTX 2000 Ada Generation vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3070 Mobile
NVIDIARTX 2000 Ada Generation vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 8GB
NVIDIARTX 2000 Ada Generation vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 4080 Mobile
NVIDIARTX 2000 Ada Generation vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB
NVIDIARTX 2000 Ada Generation vs
AMDRadeon RX 7700 XT
