NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs NVIDIA RTX A4000, AI & Machine Learning Comparison
NVIDIA RTX A4000 wins 5 of 14 benchmarks, averaging 65.7% faster.
Both cards' numbers are anchored estimates calibrated against our measured cards, pending first-party measurement. Treat small gaps as ties.
What the numbers say
The gap is widest in Qwen2.5-Coder 14B, where NVIDIA RTX A4000 leads by 76% (23.35 vs 41.13 tok/s); the closest fight is Stable Diffusion XL (46% apart); VRAM decides part of this one: NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation runs 20 of our 12 AI workloads while the other card runs 5, models that don't fit score zero.
Benchmark results head-to-head
| Benchmark | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | NVIDIA RTX A4000 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen3 4B tok/s | 70.88 | 116.23 | -39% |
| Llama 3.1 8B tok/s | 43.08 | 75.52 | -43% |
| Qwen2.5-Coder 14B tok/s | 23.35 | 41.13 | -43% |
| Gemma 4 26B A4B tok/s | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| Qwen3 30B A3B tok/s | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| Gemma 4 31B tok/s | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| Qwen3 32B tok/s | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| Llama 3.3 70B tok/s | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| Stable Diffusion XL images/min | 3.58 | 5.24 | -32% |
| FLUX.1 Kontext dev images/min | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| FLUX.1 dev images/min | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| Qwen-Image-Edit images/min | 0 | 0 | n/a |
| LTX-Video (distilled) frames/s | 1.39 | 2.319 | -40% |
| Wan 2.2 5B (720p) frames/s | 0 | 0 | n/a |
Whole-job comparison
How long each card takes to finish a complete pipeline, not just one model. NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is faster on 0 of 1; NVIDIA RTX A4000 on 1.
| Workflow | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | NVIDIA RTX A4000 | Difference | Cost per run |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full codebase review | 42.8 min | 24.3 min | NVIDIA RTX A4000 1.76x faster | $0.171 vs $0.036 |
Renting by the hour, NVIDIA RTX A4000 finishes 1 of 1 cheaper. The quicker card is not automatically the cheaper way to get the work done.
Cost to rent
| Card | Per hour |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | $0.240 |
| NVIDIA RTX A4000 | $0.088 |
NVIDIA RTX A4000 is 2.73x cheaper per hour. Cheapest on-demand rate we see across RunPod and Vast.
Specifications compared
| NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation | NVIDIA RTX A4000 | |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM | 16GB | 16GB |
| Transistors | 18,900M | 17,400M |
| Die size | 158.7 mm² | 392.5 mm² |
| Process node | 4 nm | 8 nm |
| Transistor density | 119.1 M/mm² | 44.3 M/mm² |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Ampere |
| Memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | 448 GB/s |
| Boost clock | 2,130 MHz | 1,560 MHz |
| TDP | 70 W | 140 W |
| Launch MSRP | $625 | $999 |
| Release | 2024-02-12 | 2021-04-12 |
FAQ
- Which is better for ai & machine learning: NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation or NVIDIA RTX A4000?
- NVIDIA RTX A4000 performs better for ai & machine learning, winning 5 of 14 benchmarks in our suite with an average 65.7% advantage.
- What are the main hardware differences between NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and NVIDIA RTX A4000?
- NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 16GB VRAM and a 70W TDP, while NVIDIA RTX A4000 has 16GB VRAM and a 140W TDP.
- Does VRAM matter more than speed between NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and NVIDIA RTX A4000?
- For AI, yes, NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation fits 1 more of our 12 workloads than NVIDIA RTX A4000. A model that exceeds VRAM doesn't run slower, it doesn't run at all, so the card that fits the model wins that workload outright.
- Where is the biggest performance difference between NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and NVIDIA RTX A4000?
- Qwen2.5-Coder 14B: NVIDIA RTX A4000 leads by roughly 76% (23.35 vs 41.13 tok/s) in our testing.
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation full review · NVIDIA RTX A4000 full review · All AI & Machine Learning rankings