RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs RTX A4000 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX A4000 Mobile and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX A4000 Mobile
2021
8 GB GDDR6, 115 Watt
34.76
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
35.58
+2.4%

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms RTX A4000 Mobile by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking167162
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency23.4255.16
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2025)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGA104AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date12 April 2021 (5 years ago)21 March 2023 (3 years ago)

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 cores51203072
Core clock speed1140 MHz1635 MHz
Boost clock speed1680 MHz2115 MHz
Number of transistors17,400 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate268.8203.0
Floating-point processing power17.2 TFLOPS12.99 TFLOPS
ROPs8048
TMUs16096
Tensor Cores16096
Ray Tracing Cores4024
L1 Cache5 MB3 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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16

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 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth384.0 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentPortable Device Dependent

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 Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA8.68.9
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 A4000 Mobile 34.76
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 35.58
+2.4%

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 A4000 Mobile 14481
Samples: 657
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 14821
+2.3%
Samples: 2213

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 100−110
+4%
100−105
Counter-Strike 2 190−200 200−210
+2%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+1.3%
80−85
Resident Evil 4 Remake 90−95
+2.2%
90−95

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 100−110
+4%
100−105
Battlefield 5 120−130
+4.2%
120−130
Counter-Strike 2 190−200 200−210
+2%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+1.3%
80−85
Far Cry 5 110−120
+3.6%
110−120
Fortnite 150−160
+3.3%
150−160
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+4.6%
130−140
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0.7%
140−150
Valorant 210−220 220−230
+2.3%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 100−110
+4%
100−105
Battlefield 5 120−130
+4.2%
120−130
Counter-Strike 2 190−200 200−210
+2%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 280−290
+0.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+1.3%
80−85
Dota 2 140−150
+0.7%
140−150
Far Cry 5 110−120
+3.6%
110−120
Fortnite 150−160
+3.3%
150−160
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+4.6%
130−140
Grand Theft Auto V 120−130 120−130
Metro Exodus 80−85
+2.5%
80−85
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0.7%
140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130
+0.8%
120−130
Valorant 210−220 220−230
+2.3%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130
+4.2%
120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+1.3%
80−85
Dota 2 140−150
+0.7%
140−150
Far Cry 5 110−120
+3.6%
110−120
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+4.6%
130−140
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0.7%
140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130
+0.8%
120−130
Valorant 210−220 220−230
+2.3%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+3.3%
150−160

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+1.2%
85−90
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250 250−260
+1.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+2.9%
70−75
Metro Exodus 50−55 50−55
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+2.9%
170−180
Valorant 240−250 250−260
+0.8%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+2.2%
90−95
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
Far Cry 5 85−90 85−90
Forza Horizon 4 95−100 100−105
+2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70 65−70

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 90−95
+1.1%
90−95

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
Counter-Strike 2 40−45 40−45
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75 75−80
+1.4%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 55−60
Valorant 210−220
+1.9%
210−220

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+1.8%
55−60
Counter-Strike 2 40−45 40−45
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20 18−20
Dota 2 100−110
+4%
100−105
Far Cry 5 45−50 45−50
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50 45−50

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 45−50
+2.3%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.76 35.58
Recency 12 April 2021 21 March 2023
Chip lithography 8 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 50 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile has a 2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 57% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between RTX A4000 Mobile and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile.

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.


4.5 39 votes

Rate RTX A4000 Mobile 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 RTX A4000 Mobile or RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.