
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
Popular choices:

RTX A5500
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,601 less on MSRP ($1,999 MSRP vs $3,600 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 76.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 10.3 vs 5.9 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $3,600 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 70W instead of 230W, a 160W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than RTX A5500 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 24 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Fewer Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation (192 vs 320), which can reduce FPS gains in supported games.
RTX A5500
2022Why buy it
- ✅73.6% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅66.7% more Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation, which can increase overall FPS in supported games (320 vs 192).
- ✅1100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (24 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Weaker long-term outlook: RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the safer future-proof pick thanks to newer hardware and better gaming feature support.
- ❌80.1% HIGHER MSRP$3,600 MSRPvs$1,999 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.9 vs 10.3 G3D/$ ($3,600 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
- ❌228.6% higher power demand at 230W vs 70W.
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
2023RTX A5500
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,601 less on MSRP ($1,999 MSRP vs $3,600 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 76.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 10.3 vs 5.9 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $3,600 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 70W instead of 230W, a 160W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅73.6% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅66.7% more Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation, which can increase overall FPS in supported games (320 vs 192).
- ✅1100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (24 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than RTX A5500 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 24 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Fewer Tensor Cores for AI-powered features like DLSS and frame generation (192 vs 320), which can reduce FPS gains in supported games.
Trade-offs
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Weaker long-term outlook: RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the safer future-proof pick thanks to newer hardware and better gaming feature support.
- ❌80.1% HIGHER MSRP$3,600 MSRPvs$1,999 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.9 vs 10.3 G3D/$ ($3,600 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
- ❌228.6% higher power demand at 230W vs 70W.
Quick Answers
So, is RTX A5500 better than RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation make more sense than RTX A5500?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 102 FPS | 213 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 157 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 110 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 193 FPS |
| medium | 68 FPS | 162 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 117 FPS |
| ultra | 33 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 33 FPS | 98 FPS |
| medium | 30 FPS | 83 FPS |
| high | 22 FPS | 56 FPS |
| ultra | 20 FPS | 48 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 268 FPS | 524 FPS |
| medium | 213 FPS | 458 FPS |
| high | 171 FPS | 358 FPS |
| ultra | 148 FPS | 314 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 198 FPS | 409 FPS |
| medium | 151 FPS | 349 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 270 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 226 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 91 FPS | 213 FPS |
| medium | 72 FPS | 181 FPS |
| high | 62 FPS | 150 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 124 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 465 FPS | 894 FPS |
| medium | 404 FPS | 726 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 631 FPS |
| ultra | 288 FPS | 475 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 339 FPS | 700 FPS |
| medium | 295 FPS | 564 FPS |
| high | 256 FPS | 475 FPS |
| ultra | 208 FPS | 356 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 229 FPS | 475 FPS |
| medium | 192 FPS | 380 FPS |
| high | 150 FPS | 317 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 237 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 166 FPS | 354 FPS |
| medium | 136 FPS | 316 FPS |
| high | 117 FPS | 278 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 238 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 121 FPS | 270 FPS |
| medium | 102 FPS | 247 FPS |
| high | 89 FPS | 213 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 179 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 73 FPS | 176 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 118 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 95 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation and RTX A5500

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 21 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 720 MHz to 1560 MHz. It has 6144 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 70W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 48 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 20,669 points.

RTX A5500
RTX A5500
The RTX A5500 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1080 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 10240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 230W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 80 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 21,108 points.
Graphics Performance
The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 20,669 and the RTX A5500 reaches 21,108 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is built on Ada Lovelace while the RTX A5500 uses Ampere, both on 5 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 6,144 (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 10,240 (RTX A5500). Raw compute: 19.17 TFLOPS (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 34.1 TFLOPS (RTX A5500). Boost clocks: 1560 MHz vs 1665 MHz. Ray tracing: 48 RT cores (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 80 (RTX A5500) with 192 Tensor cores vs 320.
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 20,669 | 21,108+2% |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Ampere |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 6144 | 10240+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 19.17 TFLOPS | 34.1 TFLOPS+78% |
| Boost Clock | 1560 MHz | 1665 MHz+7% |
| ROPs | 64 | 96+50% |
| TMUs | 192 | 320+67% |
| L1 Cache | 6 MB | 10 MB+67% |
| L2 Cache | 48 MB+700% | 6 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 48 | 80+67% |
| Tensor Cores | 192 | 320+67% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is support for DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The RTX A5500 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The RTX A5500 supports the newer Upscaling support, whereas the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is capped at DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution.
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the RTX A5500 has 24 GB. The RTX A5500 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 280 GB/s (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 768 GB/s (RTX A5500) — a 174.3% advantage for the RTX A5500. Bus width: 160-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 48 MB (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 6 MB (RTX A5500) — the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 24 GB+1100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 ECC | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 280 GB/s | 768 GB/s+174% |
| Bus Width | 160-bit | 384-bit+140% |
| L2 Cache | 48 MB+700% | 6 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 12.1 (RTX A5500). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 8th Gen NVENC (2x) (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 7th Gen NVENC (2x) (RTX A5500). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A5500).
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 8th Gen NVENC (2x) | 7th Gen NVENC (2x) |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation draws 70W versus the RTX A5500's 230W — a 106.7% difference. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 750W (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 450W (RTX A5500). Power connectors: 1x 8-pin vs 8-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 70W-70% | 230W |
| Recommended PSU | 750W | 450W-40% |
| Power Connector | 1x 8-pin | 8-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 295.3+222% | 91.8 |
Value Analysis
The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation launched at $1999 MSRP, while the RTX A5500 launched at $3600. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation costs 44.5% less ($1601 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 10.3 (RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation) vs 5.9 (RTX A5500) — the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation offers 74.6% better value. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2022).
| Feature | RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation | RTX A5500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1999-44% | $3600 |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.3+75% | 5.9 |
| Codename | AD104 | GA102 |
| Release | March 21 2023 | March 22 2022 |
| Ranking | #71 | #67 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












