RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
3000 Mobile 3000 Max-Q 3000 Mobile Refresh 3000 X2 Mobile 4000 Mobile 4000 Max-Q 5000 Mobile 5000 Max-Q 5000 Mobile Refresh 5000 X2 Mobile 6000 Mobile
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
2000 Ada Generation 3500 Embedded Ada Generation 4000 Ada Generation 4000 SFF Ada Generation 4500 Ada Generation 5000 Ada Generation 5880 Ada Generation 6000 Ada Generation 6000D

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000 Mobile
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
31.03
RTX 2000 Ada Generation
2024, $649
16 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
40.64
+31%

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms RTX 4000 Mobile by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
RTX 4000 Mobile RTX 4000 Mobile
RTX 2000 Ada Generation RTX 2000 Ada Generation

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking206117
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data36.89
Power efficiency21.8644.98
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTU104AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date27 May 2019 (7 years ago)12 February 2024 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

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 cores25602816
Core clock speed1110 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate249.6187.4
Floating-point processing power7.987 TFLOPS12 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs16088
Tensor Cores32088
Ray Tracing Cores4022
L1 Cache2.5 MB2.8 MB
L2 Cache4 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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
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_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.58.9
DLSS++

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 HD107140−150
+30.8%
1440p6380−85
+27%
4K4760−65
+27.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.64
1440pno data8.11
4Kno data10.82

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 90−95 110−120
+20.9%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180 230−240
+30.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 90−95
+26.8%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 80−85 100−105
+25%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 90−95 110−120
+20.9%
Battlefield 5 101 130−140
+28.7%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180 230−240
+30.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 90−95
+26.8%
Far Cry 5 106 130−140
+22.6%
Fortnite 140−150 180−190
+25.9%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 160−170
+30.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 160−170
+27%
Valorant 190−200 260−270
+30.7%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 90−95 110−120
+20.9%
Battlefield 5 87 110−120
+26.4%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180 230−240
+30.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 350−400
+26.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 90−95
+26.8%
Dota 2 132 170−180
+28.8%
Far Cry 5 100 130−140
+30%
Fortnite 140−150 180−190
+25.9%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 160−170
+30.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120 140−150
+27.3%
Metro Exodus 70−75 90−95
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 160−170
+27%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 143 180−190
+25.9%
Valorant 190−200 260−270
+30.7%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 81 100−105
+23.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 90−95
+26.8%
Dota 2 127 160−170
+26%
Far Cry 5 96 120−130
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 160−170
+30.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 160−170
+27%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75 95−100
+26.7%
Valorant 190−200 260−270
+30.7%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150 180−190
+25.9%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 70−75 95−100
+28.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230 280−290
+27.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65 80−85
+29%
Metro Exodus 40−45 55−60
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 220−230
+25.7%
Valorant 230−240 300−310
+30.4%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 66 85−90
+28.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 40−45
+17.6%
Far Cry 5 69 90−95
+30.4%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90 110−120
+29.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 70−75
+27.3%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85 100−105
+25%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 24−27 30−33
+20%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 40−45
+17.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65 80−85
+25%
Metro Exodus 27−30 35−40
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 65−70
+27.5%
Valorant 180−190 240−250
+27.7%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 42 55−60
+31%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 40−45
+17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 18−20
+20%
Dota 2 106 130−140
+22.6%
Far Cry 5 36 45−50
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60 70−75
+22.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 45−50
+18.4%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40 45−50
+18.4%

This is how RTX 4000 Mobile and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 31% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 27% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 28% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 31.03 40.64
Recency 27 May 2019 12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 31% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 58% more advanced lithography process, and 36% lower power consumption.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

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

RTX 4000 Mobile Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
vs
Pro Vega 64 Radeon Pro Vega 64
RTX 2000 Ada Generation RTX 2000 Ada Generation
vs
RTX A4000H RTX A4000H
RTX 4000 Mobile Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
vs
RTX 5000 Max-Q Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
RTX 3050 Ti Max-Q 3050 Ti Max-Q
vs
GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 1660 Ti Mobile
Arc Graphics 130T Arc Graphics 130T
vs
GTX 1660 Ti GTX 1660 Ti
T600 Mobile T600 Mobile
vs
RTX 4000 RTX 4000
GTX 570 GTX 570
vs
Tesla K80 Tesla K80
RTX 3070 RTX 3070
vs
P2000 Mobile P2000 Mobile
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
vs
RTX 3000 Mobile RTX 3000 Mobile
RTX 3050 Max-Q RTX 3050 Max-Q
vs
RTX 3000 Mobile RTX 3000 Mobile
Arc Graphics 140V Arc Graphics 140V
vs
Quadro T1000 T1000
RX 5500M RX 5500M
vs
RX 5700 5700
RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 6 GB 3050 Mobile Refresh 6 GB
vs
RTX 2060 Super 2060 Super

Community ratings

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

4.2 65 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 100 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile or RTX 2000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.