RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs RTX A4500 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX A4500 Mobile with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

RTX A4500 Mobile
2022
16 GB GDDR6, 140 Watt
40.20
RTX 2000 Ada Generation
2024, $649
16 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
40.53
+0.8%

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms RTX A4500 Mobile by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking120117
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data36.86
Power efficiency22.3144.98
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2025)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGA104AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date22 March 2022 (4 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 cores58882816
Core clock speed930 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistors17,400 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate276.0187.4
Floating-point processing power17.66 TFLOPS12 TFLOPS
ROPs9648
TMUs18488
Tensor Cores18488
Ray Tracing Cores4622
L1 Cache5.8 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 4.0 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 amount16 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 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 Dependent4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

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 Model6.76.8
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 A4500 Mobile 40.20
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 40.53
+0.8%

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 A4500 Mobile 16783
Samples: 476
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 16919
+0.8%
Samples: 1067

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 120−130
+2.5%
120−130
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+1.4%
220−230
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100 95−100
Resident Evil 4 Remake 110−120
+0.9%
110−120

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 120−130
+2.5%
120−130
Battlefield 5 130−140
+4.6%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+1.4%
220−230
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100 95−100
Far Cry 5 130−140 130−140
Fortnite 170−180
+2.9%
170−180
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+4%
150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+5.3%
150−160
Valorant 240−250 240−250

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 120−130
+2.5%
120−130
Battlefield 5 130−140
+4.6%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+1.4%
220−230
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 280−290
+0.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100 95−100
Dota 2 140−150
+4.3%
140−150
Far Cry 5 130−140 130−140
Fortnite 170−180
+2.9%
170−180
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+4%
150−160
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140
+2.3%
130−140
Metro Exodus 95−100
+3.2%
95−100
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+5.3%
150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150
+5.7%
140−150
Valorant 240−250 240−250

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+4.6%
130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100 95−100
Dota 2 140−150
+4.3%
140−150
Far Cry 5 130−140 130−140
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+4%
150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+5.3%
150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150
+5.7%
140−150
Valorant 240−250 240−250

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
+2.9%
170−180

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+5%
100−105
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280−290
+2.1%
280−290
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90 85−90
Metro Exodus 60−65 60−65
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+2.9%
170−180
Valorant 270−280
+1.5%
270−280

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+3%
100−105
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+6.7%
45−50
Far Cry 5 95−100
+4.2%
95−100
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+6.4%
110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+5.3%
75−80

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+9%
100−105

4K
High

Atomic Heart 30−35
+10%
30−33
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+6.7%
45−50
Grand Theft Auto V 90−95 90−95
Metro Exodus 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+1.5%
65−70
Valorant 240−250 250−260
+0.4%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70 65−70
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+6.7%
45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
Dota 2 110−120
+3.6%
110−120
Far Cry 5 55−60 55−60
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+4%
75−80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+3.6%
55−60

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+8%
50−55

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 40.20 40.53
Recency 22 March 2022 12 February 2024
Chip lithography 8 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between RTX A4500 Mobile and RTX 2000 Ada Generation.

Be aware that RTX A4500 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.

Community ratings

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


2.2 45 votes

Rate RTX A4500 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 RTX A4500 Mobile or RTX 2000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.