RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs GeForce RTX 3090

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 3090 with RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3090
2020, $1,499
24 GB GDDR6X, 350 Watt
63.54
+78.6%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
35.58

RTX 3090 outperforms RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking39163
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.70no data
Power efficiency14.0755.16
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2025)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGA102AD107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date1 September 2020 (6 years ago)21 March 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,499 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 cores104963072
Core clock speed1395 MHz1635 MHz
Boost clock speed1695 MHz2115 MHz
Number of transistors28,300 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)350 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate556.0203.0
Floating-point processing power35.58 TFLOPS12.99 TFLOPS
ROPs11248
TMUs32896
Tensor Cores32896
Ray Tracing Cores8224
L1 Cache10.3 MB3 MB
L2 Cache6 MB12 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length336 mmno data
Width3-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 12-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount24 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1219 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth936.2 GB/s256.0 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, 3x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

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 Model6.56.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.21.3
CUDA8.58.9
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 3090 63.54
+78.6%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 35.58

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 3090 26472
+78.6%
Samples: 17936
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 14821
Samples: 2212

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RTX 3090 61569
+113%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 28910

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RTX 3090 127269
+236%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 37844

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RTX 3090 47739
+123%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 21379

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RTX 3090 231656
+101%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 115230

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 HD187
+87%
100−110
1440p12065−70
−45.8%
4K81
+80%
45−50

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.02no data
1440p12.49no data
4K18.51no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 331
+83.9%
180−190
Counter-Strike 2 349
+83.7%
190−200
Cyberpunk 2077 209
+90%
110−120
Resident Evil 4 Remake 270
+80%
150−160

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 262
+87.1%
140−150
Battlefield 5 172
+81.1%
95−100
Counter-Strike 2 347
+82.6%
190−200
Cyberpunk 2077 178
+87.4%
95−100
Far Cry 5 208
+89.1%
110−120
Fortnite 300−350
+88.8%
160−170
Forza Horizon 4 254
+81.4%
140−150
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+82.1%
95−100
Valorant 350−400
+86.5%
200−210

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 156
+83.5%
85−90
Battlefield 5 158
+85.9%
85−90
Counter-Strike 2 309
+81.8%
170−180
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+85.3%
150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 154
+81.2%
85−90
Dota 2 217
+80.8%
120−130
Far Cry 5 196
+96%
100−105
Fortnite 300−350
+88.8%
160−170
Forza Horizon 4 247
+90%
130−140
Grand Theft Auto V 171
+80%
95−100
Metro Exodus 176
+85.3%
95−100
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+82.1%
95−100
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 369
+84.5%
200−210
Valorant 350−400
+86.5%
200−210

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 146
+82.5%
80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 136
+81.3%
75−80
Dota 2 213
+93.6%
110−120
Far Cry 5 183
+83%
100−105
Forza Horizon 4 217
+80.8%
120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+82.1%
95−100
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 182
+82%
100−105
Valorant 296
+85%
160−170

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350
+88.8%
160−170

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 231
+92.5%
120−130
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+85.2%
270−280
Grand Theft Auto V 150
+87.5%
80−85
Metro Exodus 115
+91.7%
60−65
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+84.2%
95−100
Valorant 400−450
+85.8%
240−250

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130
+85.7%
70−75
Cyberpunk 2077 93
+86%
50−55
Far Cry 5 171
+80%
95−100
Forza Horizon 4 197
+79.1%
110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 153
+80%
85−90

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+88.8%
80−85

4K
High

Atomic Heart 55−60
+93.3%
30−33
Counter-Strike 2 59
+96.7%
30−33
Grand Theft Auto V 182
+82%
100−105
Metro Exodus 76
+90%
40−45
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 154
+81.2%
85−90
Valorant 300−350
+87.1%
170−180

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 113
+88.3%
60−65
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+93.3%
45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+91.7%
24−27
Dota 2 202
+83.6%
110−120
Far Cry 5 108
+80%
60−65
Forza Horizon 4 153
+80%
85−90
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+92%
50−55

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+97.5%
40−45

This is how RTX 3090 and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3090 is 87% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3090 is 85% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3090 is 80% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 63.54 35.58
Recency 1 September 2020 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 8 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 350 Watt 50 Watt

RTX 3090 has a 79% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 86% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3090 is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3090 is a desktop graphics card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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.


1.2 80413 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.9 228 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 3090 or RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.