Moore Threads MTT S80 vs A10G
Aggregate performance score
We've compared A10G with Moore Threads MTT S80, including specs and performance data.
A10G outperforms Moore Threads MTT S80 by a whopping 484% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 183 | 656 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 16.69 | 1.68 |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2025) | MUSA |
| GPU code name | GA102 | Chunxiao |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 12 April 2021 (4 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 9216 | 4096 |
| Core clock speed | 1320 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1710 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 28,300 million | 22,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 255 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 492.5 | 460.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 31.52 TFLOPS | 14.75 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96 | 256 |
| TMUs | 288 | 256 |
| Tensor Cores | 288 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 72 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 9 MB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB | 4 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).
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 285 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 8-pin EPS | 1x 8-pin |
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 type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1563 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 600.2 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | 8.6 | - |
| 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.
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.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 32.52 | 5.57 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 8 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 255 Watt |
A10G has a 484% higher aggregate performance score, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 70% lower power consumption.
Moore Threads MTT S80, on the other hand, has a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The A10G is our recommended choice as it beats the Moore Threads MTT S80 in performance tests.
Be aware that A10G is a workstation graphics card while Moore Threads MTT S80 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
