RTX A5000 vs TITAN RTX

Place in the ranking	68	40
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.12	no data
Power efficiency	12.07	17.64
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU102	GA102
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	18 December 2018 (6 years ago)	12 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	4608	8192
Core clock speed	1350 MHz	1170 MHz
Boost clock speed	1770 MHz	1695 MHz
Number of transistors	18,600 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	280 Watt	230 Watt
Texture fill rate	509.8	433.9
Floating-point processing power	16.31 TFLOPS	27.77 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	96
TMUs	288	256
Tensor Cores	576	256
Ray Tracing Cores	72	64

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	672.0 GB/s	768.0 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	4x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	8.6
DLSS	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

TITAN RTX 48.42

RTX A5000 58.17
+20.1%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

TITAN RTX 18858

RTX A5000 22652
+20.1%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

TITAN RTX 148699

RTX A5000 155041
+4.3%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

TITAN RTX 126063

RTX A5000 138747
+10.1%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

TITAN RTX 166517

RTX A5000 190987
+14.7%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	164 −15.9%	190−200 +15.9%
1440p	103 −16.5%	120−130 +16.5%
4K	74 −14.9%	85−90 +14.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	15.24	no data
1440p	24.26	no data
4K	33.77	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart	264 −13.6%	300−310 +13.6%
Counter-Strike 2	166 −14.5%	190−200 +14.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 −13.9%	90−95 +13.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart	198 −16.2%	230−240 +16.2%
Battlefield 5	163 −16.6%	190−200 +16.6%
Counter-Strike 2	141 −13.5%	160−170 +13.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 −13.9%	90−95 +13.9%
Far Cry 5	165 −15.2%	190−200 +15.2%
Fortnite	169 −18.3%	200−210 +18.3%
Forza Horizon 4	187 −17.6%	220−230 +17.6%
Forza Horizon 5	168 −19%	200−210 +19%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	202 −18.8%	240−250 +18.8%
Valorant	348 −14.9%	400−450 +14.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	118 −18.6%	140−150 +18.6%
Battlefield 5	164 −15.9%	190−200 +15.9%
Counter-Strike 2	120 −16.7%	140−150 +16.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	270−280 −7.9%	300−310 +7.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 −13.9%	90−95 +13.9%
Dota 2	155 −16.1%	180−190 +16.1%
Far Cry 5	156 −15.4%	180−190 +15.4%
Fortnite	176 −19.3%	210−220 +19.3%
Forza Horizon 4	186 −18.3%	220−230 +18.3%
Forza Horizon 5	153 −17.6%	180−190 +17.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	152 −18.4%	180−190 +18.4%
Metro Exodus	134 −19.4%	160−170 +19.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	163 −16.6%	190−200 +16.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	267 −12.4%	300−310 +12.4%
Valorant	336 −19%	400−450 +19%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	160 −18.8%	190−200 +18.8%
Counter-Strike 2	110 −18.2%	130−140 +18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 −15.4%	90−95 +15.4%
Dota 2	148 −14.9%	170−180 +14.9%
Far Cry 5	146 −16.4%	170−180 +16.4%
Forza Horizon 4	175 −20%	210−220 +20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	136 −17.6%	160−170 +17.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	139 −15.1%	160−170 +15.1%
Valorant	236 −18.6%	280−290 +18.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

134

−19.4%

160−170
+19.4%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −11.1%	40−45 +11.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	300−350 −11.5%	350−400 +11.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	114 −14%	130−140 +14%
Metro Exodus	85 −17.6%	100−105 +17.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −20%	210−220 +20%
Valorant	307 −14%	350−400 +14%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −16.1%	130−140 +16.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	66 −13.6%	75−80 +13.6%
Far Cry 5	134 −19.4%	160−170 +19.4%
Forza Horizon 4	157 −14.6%	180−190 +14.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 −9.9%	100−105 +9.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

120−130

−13.8%

140−150
+13.8%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart	35−40 −18.4%	45−50 +18.4%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −17.4%	27−30 +17.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	134 −19.4%	160−170 +19.4%
Metro Exodus	55 −18.2%	65−70 +18.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	103 −16.5%	120−130 +16.5%
Valorant	300 −16.7%	350−400 +16.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	97 −13.4%	110−120 +13.4%
Counter-Strike 2	18 −16.7%	21−24 +16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	33 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Dota 2	146 −16.4%	170−180 +16.4%
Far Cry 5	80 −18.8%	95−100 +18.8%
Forza Horizon 4	114 −14%	130−140 +14%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	96 −14.6%	110−120 +14.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

−14.9%

85−90
+14.9%

This is how TITAN RTX and RTX A5000 compete in popular games:

RTX A5000 is 16% faster in 1080p
RTX A5000 is 17% faster in 1440p
RTX A5000 is 15% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	48.42	58.17
Recency	18 December 2018	12 April 2021
Chip lithography	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	280 Watt	230 Watt

RTX A5000 has a 20.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 21.7% lower power consumption.

The RTX A5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the TITAN RTX in performance tests.

Be aware that TITAN RTX is a desktop card while RTX A5000 is a workstation one.