Radeon RX 7800M vs GeForce RTX 2080

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 2080 with Radeon RX 7800M, including specs and performance data.

RTX 2080
2018, $699
8 GB GDDR6, 215 Watt
44.39
+5.7%

RTX 2080 outperforms 7800M by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking98106
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation19.26no data
Power efficiency16.0818.16
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameTU104Navi 32
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date20 September 2018 (8 years ago)11 September 2024 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores29443840
Core clock speed1515 MHz1295 MHz
Boost clock speed1710 MHz2539 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)215 Watt180 Watt
Texture fill rate314.6609.4
Floating-point processing power10.07 TFLOPSno data
ROPs6496
TMUs184240
Tensor Cores368no data
Ray Tracing Cores4660
L0 Cacheno data960 KB
L1 Cache2.9 MB768 KB
L2 Cache4 MB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data48 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB12 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s432.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-CPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.9
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.0
Vulkan1.31.4
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

RTX 2080 44.39
+5.7%
RX 7800M 41.98

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.

RTX 2080 18572
+5.8%
Samples: 12067
RX 7800M 17562
Samples: 56

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 HD144
+10.8%
130−140
1440p10195−100
−5.9%
4K73
+12.3%
65−70

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.85no data
1440p6.92no data
4K9.58no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 130−140
+6.2%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 240−250
+10%
220−230
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+7%
100−105
Resident Evil 4 Remake 120−130
+14.5%
110−120

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 130−140
+6.2%
130−140
Battlefield 5 163
+8.7%
150−160
Counter-Strike 2 240−250
+10%
220−230
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+7%
100−105
Far Cry 5 117
+6.4%
110−120
Fortnite 199
+10.6%
180−190
Forza Horizon 4 156
+11.4%
140−150
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 209
+10%
190−200
Valorant 263
+9.6%
240−250

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 130−140
+6.2%
130−140
Battlefield 5 155
+10.7%
140−150
Counter-Strike 2 240−250
+10%
220−230
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+6.9%
260−270
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+7%
100−105
Dota 2 140−150
+6.4%
140−150
Far Cry 5 112
+12%
100−105
Fortnite 173
+8.1%
160−170
Forza Horizon 4 153
+9.3%
140−150
Grand Theft Auto V 131
+9.2%
120−130
Metro Exodus 90
+5.9%
85−90
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 188
+10.6%
170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 181
+6.5%
170−180
Valorant 254
+5.8%
240−250

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 145
+11.5%
130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+7%
100−105
Dota 2 140−150
+6.4%
140−150
Far Cry 5 106
+6%
100−105
Forza Horizon 4 132
+10%
120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 169
+12.7%
150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 106
+6%
100−105
Valorant 223
+6.2%
210−220

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 156
+11.4%
140−150

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+9.1%
110−120
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+6.3%
300−310
Grand Theft Auto V 95−100
+6.7%
90−95
Metro Exodus 60
+9.1%
55−60
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+9.4%
160−170
Valorant 247
+7.4%
230−240

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 125
+13.6%
110−120
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+10%
50−55
Far Cry 5 99
+10%
90−95
Forza Horizon 4 118
+7.3%
110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90−95
+8.2%
85−90

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 128
+6.7%
120−130

4K
High

Atomic Heart 35−40
+23.3%
30−33
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+10%
50−55
Grand Theft Auto V 107
+7%
100−105
Metro Exodus 39
+11.4%
35−40
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 76
+8.6%
70−75
Valorant 234
+6.4%
220−230

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 76
+8.6%
70−75
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+10%
50−55
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
Dota 2 120−130
+10.9%
110−120
Far Cry 5 59
+7.3%
55−60
Forza Horizon 4 81
+8%
75−80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 69
+6.2%
65−70

4K
Epic

Fortnite 65
+8.3%
60−65

This is how RTX 2080 and RX 7800M compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2080 is 11% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2080 is 6% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2080 is 12% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 44.39 41.98
Recency 20 September 2018 11 September 2024
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 215 Watt 180 Watt

RTX 2080 has a 6% higher aggregate performance score.

RX 7800M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 58% more advanced lithography process, and 16% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce RTX 2080 and Radeon RX 7800M.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 2080 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon RX 7800M is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 2721 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2080 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 16 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 2080 or Radeon RX 7800M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.